[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: de-Tor-iorate Anonymity
- To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: de-Tor-iorate Anonymity
- From: "F. Fox" <kitsune.or@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 18:24:09 -0700
- Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Thu, 29 May 2008 21:24:21 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xImyKWRcYei06y0nZYF9aPqPTY39ZdsyAQyVFT0hltY=; b=Ty9tu5HAABoXmPCiaGyYuq/kixpzINYwgYXeeP7ZtY9TM2V/8ql4I5KBqR4ht6SOaaoT0n2CIE4NBzAoopvK0a5OaQTACd2PACkaAcgjBWaTTj+RVKmbe71ABhs0yIqNdNI+KriJKDAqOyYGzHnT7X2XORp2Aja7/S8iwbYlG4Y=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=dwkVAjvxux123E/w37Vxl114l2yCKK6MHR1WigZkqr9cPNKEq5pIRnNWv1zhCxdAsVQkkGOe9p68nuEI0NqSgqqFArImoh0pznWrIOC93QjX63t5MIyZCSPR0Uo1UOd0eKHw2kMU947tnKYWKsoIaYbhYoMWB2UQV9sdhiREMZQ=
- In-reply-to: <4ef5fec60805291252u3cbcf874h574343f6d9594026@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <4ef5fec60805291252u3cbcf874h574343f6d9594026@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080509)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
The whole thing sound a little slanted to me, especially in combination
with the whole "Phantom Protocol" thing.
In particular, I found this line interesting:
"as well as show results from *A* Tor network that reveals the paths
that data travels when using Tor. This method can make using the Tor
network no more secure than using a simple open web proxy."
Notice the A in asterisks. This makes me think that the attack may have
been done on a private Tor network (rather than the main, public one).
If that's true, it's a far cry from carrying it out on the real Tor
network. Conditions are far more chaotic, and - most importantly - nodes
are spread out over many jurisdictions, in different countries, under
the control of many parties.
I don't know if this is the same attack mentioned before on this list
due to be presented tomorrow (30 May), but it seems to have the same
weaknesses from the overview.
I suppose only the full presentation will tell; I'll be watching this
subject, anyway.
- --
F. Fox
AAS, CompTIA A+/Network+/Security+
Owner of Tor node "kitsune"
http://fenrisfox.livejournal.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQIVAwUBSD9XOej8TXmm2ggwAQh1XA//d4XZLRJE1V8IHqF/sMvpNNQbCsaaaNAg
ymc6gSJQ2M70ePwqfkdoOz+yvweY0xDvyS87KeIj50xBTB9DqygnsmMbYnU4KzM6
zF570GJMsVbVGRnWYYH/xfq5uwKKEznMS2i9qQAdQAwpWd6IhKok7QPpYT0skrci
Wf4pmM4mckGcrHNziIB3BAC8wsZxHX3MWUsdzm9YqrocpMQnYHbDwZdw+V0UU0zl
4LrwzlWiWAhBRB+CD4+CGLoR4HGmBBL6PHo560X/JMmCLA0K/rzCkQ4RRz/Bu9am
v1UZXFDoiRJkCdrit0MYWhsAqLZ6+sO5CuiK14vATSjyZwndpxiFcOSRya/OE+jL
MT7BM4bA4jVeKpcuPauDhiMKgTe7uqcOwFrA8eW/eV6V9gmreAhbmZtRw47CA+Py
1y9DngpxT62Q0+uEm+ftj9mWsd/SJHqRCGp+5apg6en/VPKPB78smtPjE3pAwnGu
/la6H9HI3OIr/5ddhrtK3i0Z+NvXA0xEtSHgQ/0hZEDEM03f3aOB4IJKvKiSwvuv
wKXf2w7uJyIAYxH/mbd2RbEd7kXLE40OXvDgjC99qq3+DiSw2NFPJJGVK6NeeYBx
te276Bm3AvPtS7tlYZBQ21DCHioiYDz9Ryi7YpwQ/Pm1R6YapLgejwOgeu12WgM8
IECwQasCoFs=
=Iwwa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----