[freehaven-cvs] fix earlier things, plus polish sec5

[arma@seul.org (Roger Dingledine)]

Update of /home/freehaven/cvsroot/doc/routing-zones
In directory moria.mit.edu:/home2/arma/work/freehaven/doc/routing-zones

Modified Files:
	routing-zones.tex 
Log Message:
fix earlier things, plus polish sec5


Index: routing-zones.tex
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/freehaven/cvsroot/doc/routing-zones/routing-zones.tex,v
retrieving revision 1.45
retrieving revision 1.46
diff -u -d -r1.45 -r1.46
--- routing-zones.tex	28 Jan 2004 23:37:09 -0000	1.45
+++ routing-zones.tex	29 Jan 2004 01:38:41 -0000	1.46
@@ -380,14 +380,13 @@
 
 A successful endpoint attack against a high-latency system like
 Mixmaster takes a lot more time and effort than one against a low-latency
-system like Tor.  Because an observer of even a few Mixmaster nodes
+system like Tor.  However, because an observer of even a few Mixmaster nodes
 may be able to link Alice to her recipients over time~\cite{e2e-traffic},
 our work here also has impact on protecting such high-latency systems
-from a one-AS adversary.  Further, intra-network observations,
-flooding messages into the network~\cite{trickle02}, or
-simply waiting for periods of low traffic may 
-the attack more effective by shrinking the set of messages that mix with
-Alice's 
+from a one-AS adversary.  Further, intra-network observations
+(particularly during periods of low traffic) can be combined with active
+attacks such as message flooding to shrink the set of messages that mix
+with Alice's
 message~\cite{disad-free-routes,minion-design}. As a simple example,
 an adversary who learns the first half of Alice's path learns where to
 make his next phone call to track Alice's recipient.
@@ -546,28 +545,30 @@
 
 \section{Data}
 
-In this section, we summarize the data that we use in or analysis of
-AS-level paths in mix networks.  In our analysis of mix networks, we
-perform our analysis based on the location of mix nodes today.  We then
+In this section, we summarize the data that we use in our analysis of
+AS-level paths in mix networks. % In our analysis of mix networks, we
+Our analysis of mix networks is based 
+%We base our analysis 
+on the location of mix
+nodes in deployed systems today.  We then
 describe the data we used to generate the AS-level network topology.
 
 \subsection{Mix Networks, Senders, and Receivers}
 
-To evaluate node selection in the Mixmaster and Tor networks, we use the
-list of operational mix nodes for each respective network; the tables
-Appendix~\ref{sec:mixnode_summary} provide lists of mix nodes for each
-of these networks.
+To evaluate node selection in the Mixmaster and Tor models, we use the
+list of operational mix nodes for each respective network; the tables in
+Appendix~\ref{sec:mixnode_summary} provide lists of mix nodes for the
+two networks.
 
-Since we are also interested in the AS-level paths between the sender
-(Alice) and the mix entry point, and between the mix exit point and the
-receiver (Bob) we must also estimate the ASes where the sender (Alice)
-and receiver (Bob) may typically be located.  Unfortunately, usage data
-for these mix networks is not readily available, so it is not possible
-to drive our simulation with lists of common locations of senders and
-receivers.  Nevertheless, we can perform reasonable approximations by
-assuming that Alice is located on a home network (e.g., a cable modem
-network, a DSL network, etc.) and that Bob is a content host located at
-a data hosting ISP.
+Since we are also interested in the AS-level paths between Alice and
+the mix entry point, and between the mix exit point and Bob, we must
+also estimate the ASes where Alice and Bob may typically be located.
+Unfortunately, usage data for these mix networks is not readily available,
+so it is not possible to drive our simulation with lists of common
+locations of senders and receivers.  Nevertheless, we can perform
+reasonable approximations by assuming that Alice is located on a home
+network (e.g., a cable modem network, a DSL network, etc.) and that Bob
+is a content host located at a data hosting ISP.
 
 To generate a reasonable list of ASes where senders might be
 located, we created a list of DSL and cable modem providers from {\tt
@@ -579,8 +580,17 @@
 lists of senders and receivers that we used in our experiments are in
 Appendix~\ref{sec:send_recv}.
 
+Note that in this paper we use these networks to get a plausible set of
+nodes for our model. The Tor nodes represent a newborn network where the
+only participants are developers and very early adopters, whereas the
+Mixmaster network represents a wider participant set because it has been
+deployed for many years. We compare how each of these node sets performs
+when the initiators are typical DSL or cablemodem users in the US, and the
+responders are popular websites in the US---in effect, we are evaluating
+the safety of the newborn Tor network and the safety of a node set that
+we hope reflects how the Tor network will look when it grows more mature.
 
-\subsection{Network Topology}
+\subsection{Internet Topology}
 
 To generate an estimate of the Internet's AS-level topology, we use the
 routing table dump from the {\tt route-views.oregon-ix.net} route server

***********************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@seul.org with
unsubscribe freehaven-cvs       in the body. http://freehaven.net/