Slashdot Log In
Tor: A JAP Replacement
Posted by
CowboyNeal
on Thu Aug 05, 2004 08:14 PM
from the trust-no-one dept.
from the trust-no-one dept.
kid_wonder writes "Wired is running an article describing an answer to this previous /. story. Packets are sent through a network of randomly selected servers each of which knows only its predecessor and successor. Packets are unwrapped by a symmetric encryption key at each server that peels off one layer and reveals instructions for the next downstream node. As a 'connection-based low-latency anonymous communication system,' Tor seems to be the answer to JAP to allow anonymous networking activities of all kinds."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Before you know it... (Score:5, Insightful)
sigh...
Talk about politically incorrect (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Talk about politically incorrect (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Freenet? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Freenet? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Freenet? (Score:5, Insightful)
But my point is just because it can be used for bad purposes does not mean it necessarily will.
Parent
Re:Freenet? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Freenet? (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Freenet? (Score:5, Insightful)
First, your dismissal of people who live in China is incredibly inappropriate. Over a billion people live there, and you just dismissed them out of hand. And then there's the exile situation; what about somebody who's now living in the US who still can't speak out freely because of repercussions on friends/family back home? Do they simply not count?
There are plenty of other reasons, though, all the way from "VP in Fortune 500 company wants to expose toxic waste problems without risking being found out as the source" to "I'm such an incredibly paranoid person that I don't want to risk the wrath of the US government for posting these funny pictures of Bush" all the way to the classic standby, "because I want to".
I don't use Freenet, but I also don't simply assume that everybody who searches for perfect anonymity must be a reprehensible criminal.
Parent
Re:Freenet? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Freenet? (Score:3, Insightful)
First of all, I disagree that that is the "only real reason" why a person would need that much anonymity, but that's not what I'm going to argue.
Rather, I have a simple question for you: What do you think is wrong with wanting that much privacy, even if you don't strictly need it?
Re:Freenet? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Freenet vs onion routing (Score:5, Informative)
In onion routing the client picks N nodes from the list of servers and encrypts using each servers public key. Then sends the data to the first server. In onion routing each packet of data contains the entire routing list, though it is encrypted in such a way that each node can only tell what the next node is.
Each Freenet nodes caches data blocks based on demand. When a request arrives looking for a data block Freenet forwards the request to a node that has similar information until the correct block is found. Each freenet node only knows about the next and previous nodes, and the route is determined by the key you are searching for.
Parent
Re:Freenet vs onion routing (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Freenet? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Freenet? (Score:4, Informative)
Not in the same form.
Freenet allows posting of data, which does travel through multiple nodes, much like this one. It also allows retrieval of data. However, the two are separate operations. You don't establish a connection between the publisher of data and the reciever, which means Freenet tends to be unsuitable for things that require even remotely interactive latency. I think Tor might wind up being a bit high for, say, SSH, but it could easily be just fine for instant messaging -- two people that don't know each other by anything but pseudonyms and cannot trace each other can conduct conversations.
Parent
hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
No, but seriously, the blurb says this is low latency, how that's the case, I fail to see. First client wants to send a HTTP GET or something similar via Tor, so every packet involved needs that info, plus a little bit extra to get it to the next node, plus a little bit more so the end node knows where it needs to be in the end on the return. So that's two extra little bits, then the stuff gets sent one node across which takes its info off and puts new info on.
Where is the low latency here? All this peeling/adding layers to peel off must be fairly time consuming. I'll admit I quite like the idea, and as soon as I click Submit I'm going to download and try it, but I fail to see how this can be faster than say, InvisibleIRC (IIP) was.
Re:hmmm (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Benjamin Franklin (Score:3, Funny)
I need my data at the speed of light, bitches!
Re:hmmm (Score:5, Informative)
I believe the encryption is layered on from the start, and peeling occurs at each transfer, not peel/crypt/peel/crypt/etc.
I was surprised to see no one posted this earlier; the author of Tor gave a very good presentation at DEFCON last week, and I'll have to get out my CD with his presentation on it, but it's different from Freenet in a few ways. For one, apparently Freenet isn't totally free.
As a side-note, the author is still working on a method to accept/sign-up/recruit primary [trusted] nodes.
Parent
I would imagine (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I would imagine (Score:3, Insightful)
# of Japanese that will ever hear of "JAP" *
# that are actually offended = a real small number (probably)
#sarcasm# Hey, maybe only a really small number of black people are reading this, so let's call it NIGR! #/sarcasm#
Honestly, what you said is very stupid. I'm not a fan of PC, but the argument "maybe they'll never know it" is wrong. Have you heard the term World Wide Web?
Not Like Freenet (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyway, for those asking, no, this isn't quite like Freenet. In TOR, you decide which points you want to send traffic through (and negotiate encryption keys with each one individually), and, unlike FreeNet, you can tunnel existing protocols over it (like, say http).
There's a lot of promise here, but in his talk, he was looking for sites that had at least 1Mbps up & down speeds for nodes. This isn't quite like Peekabooty, in that right now they're not looking for everyone to run a middleman node.
Re:Not Like Freenet (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Not Like Freenet (Score:4, Interesting)
Interestingly, one of the other reasons is that he managed to convince the Navy that others would use and trust the code (therefore making the Navy's use of it more difficult to detect) if those others could read the code and implement it themselves. I'm honestly kinda surprised (but happy) that the Navy agreed to it.
Parent
Onion routing (Score:5, Funny)
I've just tried to set www.theonion.com:8800 as http proxy but it doesn't work...
Re:Onion routing (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Why would the government fund something... (Score:4, Interesting)
If the Navy is funding this project, don't you think they have already found a way of monitoring it?
Re:Why would the government fund something... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why would the government fund something... (Score:3, Insightful)
that reach far beyond this tor thing. If not, then this is probably okay. =)
Been around for awhile... (Score:5, Informative)
Such systems right now have too high a latency and too much overhead (such as a peer sending "noise" into the network when not having the need to send any real data, just to deter packet analysis) that they aren't terribly practical... for now. So you most likely won't see the technology bundled in the next KaZaA, BitTorrent, etc., but we'll see what the future holds.
- sm
Re:Been around for awhile... (Score:3, Interesting)
too bad... (Score:3, Funny)
lessons from cp remailers? (Score:4, Insightful)
The model is bad, because the people running the servers (like the old cypherpunk remailers) are supposed to provide services for free, out of the goodness of their hearts, and take the heat when people do malicious stuff with the network.
It seems to me that it's not a bad technical system, but that it fails when you start to think about the social and economic realities of the net.
Re:lessons from cp remailers? (Score:4, Insightful)
sorry, couldn't resist.
still, email works.
these systems are mostly meant for distributing the possible heat anyways.. and making it impossible to pinpoint it on anyone spesific(because you don't even know what you're routing). the problem is when there's some naive people running these that start crying once they figure out what's anonymity mostly needed for(like freenet, they make a system that's practically meant for distributing banned materials and start crying when they realise that the materia had reasons to be banned in the first place..)..
for a normal user though these just mean assurance of that if RIAA/MPAA starts being veeery aggressive about p2p people will switch to some more advanced version of p2p even if it comes with severe performance(speed) hit.
Parent
Re:lessons from cp remailers? (Score:3, Insightful)
When doesn't it happen? Freedom of Speech comes to mind. It all sounds great until people find out the KKK are protected. Everything's like that. The best you can hope for is it does more good than harm.
You missed some points. (Score:5, Interesting)
1. The Navy is bankrolling the development, presumably to allow government employees to surf around without leaving ".gov" and ".mil" ip addresses in logs.
2. JAP supposedly has a German Government implanted backdoor that this one shouldn't because it's open source.
I think that the US Government is bankrolling it to piss off the Chinese.
Re:You missed some points. (Score:3, Interesting)
you can get the sourcecode for JAP here [tu-dresden.de].
they were told to record access to a child porn site, which they did (visible in the source). they cought one access to that site, but the data had to be deleted after another court ruling which declared the surveillance illegal.
Apparently there's a Japanese version as well.... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
An Important Message (Score:5, Funny)
This technology will certainly become a favored tool of terrorists trying to avoid the justice of the Bush administration.
Sincerely,
The MPAA.
Right hand, talk to left hand please! (Score:4, Funny)
Nothing new (Score:3, Informative)
Is the route preselected? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is there some way of optimizing a path through a given number of nodes without keeping huge amounts of information about latency on every two nodes, or is this just bouncing the packet around for a while for anonymity and accepting the added latency, plus possibly the time it takes to detect and resend packets when one node in a path suddenly goes dead, making the custom-encrypted packet worthless?
Re:Is the route preselected? (Score:4, Informative)
Correct. The sender wraps the whole onion, and each router removes one layer.
Is there some way of optimizing a path through a given number of nodes without keeping huge amounts of information about latency on every two nodes, or is this just bouncing the packet around for a while for anonymity and accepting the added latency?
It's more like the latter. Optimizing for performance tends to be at odds with anonymity.
Parent
Mixmaster for TCP? (Score:3, Insightful)
Anonymous mailer technology (Score:5, Interesting)
I was at a presentation by the guy behind MixMaster and was impressed by all the thought that has gone into the various generations of the application. They even had it generating fake messages so you can't do traffic analysis.
Onion Routing (Score:5, Interesting)
It's important to note that there are some statistical attacks on both of these systems, and none of them are very secure for long communication sessions when group membership churns, as in a peer-to-peer network.
Oh, for God's sake... (Score:4, Interesting)
TOR Ready! Website logo & list (Score:3, Insightful)
It is nice to know Tor supports standard protocols like http://. But do you really believe those "Tor Ready!" websites will start popping up any time soon? I don't think so. The majority of todays websites do not validate [w3.org], doesn't support IPv6 and many don't even render correctly in the majority of web browsers. Will Tor-Ready be prioritized higher by the average webmaster than these and other more serious issues?
I am also very skeptical to the bandwidth requirements and the latency. My Ipv6 connection gives me full bandwidth, but I do notice that connections going through the tunnel are, in fact, much more latent than normal native Ipv4 connections. So why would I prefer to visit some website using Tor when the real difference is a longer loading period? Yes, what the author says about low latency may be true. It may have less latency than alternatives, but do not try to tell me I won't notice significantly higher latency if I try to IRC through a TOR connection.
People are talking about Ipv6 becoming standard in 5-6 years, I will be amazed if tor still exists at that point in time and even more amazed if it's actually implemented on more than 0.0001% of the Internet's services.
Re:Why was this modded down? (Score:4, Insightful)
I just don't have any sympathy for people overinduling in their own victimhood. There are people starving around the world, an African continent full of AIDS, people without access to uncontaminated drinkable water, and someone is going to complain about the choice of word that someone uses to describe them, or even more ridiculously, a three-letter-acronym that happens to match up with that word? How can anyone remotely sympathize with someone complaining about this? If they really can't think of a single worthwhile issue to complain about, I'd suggest the upcoming US presidential election, which stands to significantly impact a lot more people than the term that someone uses to refer to a group of people.
Parent