Re: [tor-bugs] #17434 [Core Tor/DocTor]: DocTor should understand the shared randomness protocol

["Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki" <blackhole@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

#17434: DocTor should understand the shared randomness protocol
-----------------------------+--------------------------
 Reporter:  asn              |          Owner:  atagar
     Type:  enhancement      |         Status:  reopened
 Priority:  Medium           |      Milestone:
Component:  Core Tor/DocTor  |        Version:
 Severity:  Normal           |     Resolution:
 Keywords:                   |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:                   |         Points:
 Reviewer:                   |        Sponsor:
-----------------------------+--------------------------

Comment (by asn):

 Replying to [comment:6 dgoulet]:
 > Here is some information about what DocTor should look for:
 >
 >
 https://storm.torproject.org/shared/nFWmJv7iSzzek1goqARb7IySKvkdIvKFFBYOjunDTSa

 Took a look and I find the attack detection heuristics reasonable.

 In section `3) Missing shared random value (SRV)` we have:
 {{{

 Two lines we are looking for in the consensus:

     "shared-rand-previous-value ..."
     "shared-rand-current-value ..."

 If one of those lines is not present in the consensus, warning.
 }}}

 I imagine that we are going to be missing an SRV for the first few months
 of deploying this feature simply because not enough dirauths support it.
 Do we actually want to warn everytime?

 Maybe we should warn only after we've seen SRVs in the past? Or maybe if
 enough people had participated in previous rounds of the protocol? Not
 sure how easy these things can be done in DocTor.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/17434#comment:7>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs