Re: Answer by perfect-privacy.com Re: perfect-privacy.com, Family specifications, etc.

[Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxx>]

On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 09:44:21PM +0200, Moritz Bartl wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: - Medium - Tor servers, Tor community wants to disable your
> nodes - General
> Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 13:46:04 +0200
> From: Perfect Privacy Administration <admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Organization: PP Internet Services
[snip]
> A proposal to the TOR developers:  I don't know if it's technically
> possible, but maybe one could introduce a "BelongingToFamily" entry or a
> similarly named command in future versions of TOR which could work as
> such, as that every server which contains the same "BelongingToFamily"
> entry (e.g. "BelongingToFamily xyz") belongs to the family "xyz".
> 
> That way one wouldn't have to enumerate all server names in the
> "MyFamily" section of each and every individual torrc file what causes
> an enormous effort if one adds a lot of servers (and donates a lot of
> traffic) to the Tor network.  As mentioned, we currently would have to
> edit 45+ torrc files on 45+ TOR servers whenever a server is added or
> removed, and the number of our servers is constantly increasing.

The trouble here is that if we make family declarations one-sided, then
I can tell everybody that I'm in blutmagie's family (and X's family and
Y's family and Z's family and ...), and suddenly I'm influencing the
path selection of other clients in a way I shouldn't be able to.

We need to have each set of relays in a family declare the others,
or it's open to attacks like this.

--Roger

***********************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe or-talk    in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/