Re: Proposal of a new hidden wiki

["Ringo Kamens" <2600denver@xxxxxxxxx>]

I just googled for raid over network, but I didn't find anything so
maybe I made it up? How about a
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storage_area_network? This still wouldn't
fix the problem of a server "going to the dark side" but it would
probably be a bit more practical. I have heard of YaCy which is a
distributed search engine and I think there's at least one active node
indexing tor. Is there any program like YaCy that would generate link
directories?
Comrade Ringo Kamens

On 8/9/07, Josh McFarlane <josh.mcfarlane@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 8/9/07, Ringo Kamens <2600denver@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The way we were describing, by giving trusted servers the private key
> > to make a redundant wiki system wouldn't have that problem unless on
> > of the trusted servers gave away the key or got taken over by an
> > adversary (police or what have you).
>
> However, this still relies on detection of a compromised server. Say
> an adversary silently compromises a server, and does not make it known
> that they now have direct access to the private key. They can now
> launch additional servers that connect into the distributed service
> without any barriers. This is detected, and the private key is
> changed. The compromised server admin, not realizing that his server
> has been compromised, updates his key also. Then, the adversary has
> the new key.
>
> The method I proposed limits this affect, as any new servers need to
> be indexed by the relevant wiki owners. If a server is compromised but
> no data is tampered with, it doesn't matter since the compromised
> server can only affect it's own service listings. Any wiki de-synching
> could quickly get it removed from the listings on the other services
> hosting the wiki.
>
> > I actually thought about this a lot before the thread started. A
> > standard installer CD for a customized linux distro could be made that
> > when installed would ask for your hidden service private key. Then, it
> > would have a small partition on a local, encrypted drive for apache,
> > sql, and whatever else you would need which would (in the best
> > situation) run off an external hard drive. Then you would have a
> > network raid array that ran over tor, so when a wiki edit was made it
> > was made to that raid array and everything would be updated, almost
> > instantly. Does anybody see any potential problems there?
> > Comrade Ringo Kamens
>
> I think the biggest problem here is ensuring that it's not a password
> security issue. Relying on the secrecy of the private key means any
> compromise will have drastic affects on the service performance as a
> whole. It might be better to try to come up with a solution that does
> not rely on a shared secret private key.
>
> The difficulty of updating with hosts with my solution could be easily
> remedied with a tool that pulled from all the other hosts on your
> current list and informed you of any new links. This way you could
> easily review any suspicious links, and barring any detectable
> compromise, add them in batches say once a week.
>
> I think the distribution platform could also use some more discussion,
> but I don't think this is going to be a Tor implementation issue, but
> rather just finding the most effective method of live synchronized
> changes. How do you plan on making a network raid array via the Tor
> network?
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Josh McFarlane
> http://www.joshmcfarlane.com
>