[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
[or-cvs] r8852: put in a lot of blocking-related roadmap items, all of which (tor/trunk/doc/design-paper)
- To: or-cvs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [or-cvs] r8852: put in a lot of blocking-related roadmap items, all of which (tor/trunk/doc/design-paper)
- From: arma@xxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 02:38:21 -0500 (EST)
- Delivered-to: archiver@seul.org
- Delivered-to: or-cvs-outgoing@seul.org
- Delivered-to: or-cvs@seul.org
- Delivery-date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 02:38:29 -0500
- Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-cvs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Author: arma
Date: 2006-10-29 02:38:21 -0500 (Sun, 29 Oct 2006)
New Revision: 8852
Modified:
tor/trunk/doc/design-paper/roadmap-2007.tex
Log:
put in a lot of blocking-related roadmap items, all of which
need to be fleshed out more.
Modified: tor/trunk/doc/design-paper/roadmap-2007.tex
===================================================================
--- tor/trunk/doc/design-paper/roadmap-2007.tex 2006-10-29 04:54:35 UTC (rev 8851)
+++ tor/trunk/doc/design-paper/roadmap-2007.tex 2006-10-29 07:38:21 UTC (rev 8852)
@@ -240,28 +240,34 @@
their ideas about how we can improve Tor's efficacy as an anti-censorship
tool.
-
\subsection{Implementation: client-side and bridges-side}
-Our anticensorship design calls for some nodes to act as ``bridges'' that can
-circumvent a national firewall, and others inside the firewall to act as pure
-clients. This part of the design is quite clear-cut; we're probably ready to begin
-implementing it. To implement bridges, we need only to have servers publish
-themselves as limited-availability relays to a special bridge authority if
-they judge they'd make good servers. Clients need a flexible interface to
-learn about bridges and to act on knowledge of bridges.
+Our anticensorship design calls for some nodes to act as ``bridges''
+that are outside a national firewall, and others inside the firewall to
+act as pure clients. This part of the design is quite clear-cut; we're
+probably ready to begin implementing it. To {\bf implement bridges}, we
+need to have servers publish themselves as limited-availability relays
+to a special bridge authority if they judge they'd make good servers.
+We will also need to help provide documentation for port forwarding,
+and an easy configuration tool for running as a bridge.
+
+To {\bf implement clients}, we need to provide a flexible interface to
+learn about bridges and to act on knowledge of bridges. We also need
+to teach them how to know to use bridges as their first hop, and how to
+fetch directory information from both classes of directory authority.
+
Clients also need to {\bf use the encrypted directory variant} added in Tor
0.1.2.3-alpha. This will let them retrieve directory information over Tor
-once they've got their initial bridges.
+once they've got their initial bridges. We may want to get the rest of the
+Tor user base to begin using this encrypted directory variant too, to
+provide cover.
Bridges will want to be able to {\bf listen on multiple addresses and ports}
if they can, to give the adversary more ports to block.
-Additionally, we should {\bf resist content-based filters}. Though an
-adversary can't see what users are saying, some aspects of our protocol are
-easy to fingerprint {\em as} Tor. We should correct this where possible.
+\subsection{Research: anonymity implications from becoming a bridge}
-\subsection{Implementation: bridge authorities}
+\subsection{Implementation: bridge authority}
The design here is also reasonably clear-cut: we need to run some
directory authorities with a slightly modified protocol that doesn't leak
@@ -269,12 +275,47 @@
for bridges they already know about, but they can't learn about arbitrary
new bridges.
-\subsection{Implementation: how users discover bridges}
+\subsection{Normalizing the Tor protocol on the wire}
+Additionally, we should {\bf resist content-based filters}. Though an
+adversary can't see what users are saying, some aspects of our protocol are
+easy to fingerprint {\em as} Tor. We should correct this where possible.
+Look like Firefox; or look like nothing?
+Future research: investigate timing similarities with other protocols.
+
+\subsection{Access control for bridges}
+Design/impl: password-protecting bridges, in light of above.
+And/or more general access control.
+
+\subsection{Research: scanning-resistance}
+
+\subsection{Research/Design/Impl: how users discover bridges}
Our design anticipates an arms race between discovery methods and censors.
We need to begin the infrastructure on our side quickly, preferably in a
flexible language like Python, so we can adapt quickly to censorship.
+phase one: personal bridges
+phase two: families of personal bridges
+phase three: more structured social network
+phase four: bag of tricks
+Research: phase five...
+
+Integration with Psiphon, etc?
+
+\subsection{Document best practices for users}
+Document best practices for various activities common among
+blocked users (e.g. WordPress use).
+
+\subsection{Research: how to know if a bridge has been blocked?}
+
+\subsection{GeoIP maintenance, and "private" user statistics}
+How to know if the whole idea is working?
+
+\subsection{Research: hiding whether the user is reading or publishing?}
+
+\subsection{Research: how many bridges do you need to know to maintain
+reachability?}
+
\subsection{Resisting censorship of the Tor website, docs, and mirrors}
We should take some effort to consider {\bf initial distribution of Tor and