Re: [tor-bugs] #12777 [meek]: Decide how to handle multiple meek backends in Tor Launcher

["Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki" <blackhole@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

#12777: Decide how to handle multiple meek backends in Tor Launcher
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
     Reporter:  dcf      |      Owner:  dcf
         Type:  task     |     Status:  needs_review
     Priority:  normal   |  Milestone:
    Component:  meek     |    Version:
   Resolution:           |   Keywords:  TorBrowserTeam201408,
Actual Points:           |  MikePerry201408R
       Points:           |  Parent ID:
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Comment (by dcf):

 Replying to [comment:2 asn]:
 > Replying to [comment:1 dcf]:
 > > What I'm worried about is a user looking at this list of weird names
 and not knowing which to pick. Adding more meeks isn't going to help
 things.
 >
 > Yes, this is the problem...
 >
 > However, I wonder if the two extra meeks make it that worse. I mean, as
 long as there is a recommended PT (in this case obfs3), I think that's
 what most users will try, and only if that fails they will try the other
 "weird" options.
 >
 > Maybe changing it to `meek over Amazon` and `meek over Google` will make
 it more obvious? I think we can use whitespace as normal.

 Also note that there are good operation reasons why we wouldn't want to
 have a lot of backends. Each one requires becoming a CDN customer, which
 takes money and attention. E.g. currently I have a couple of prepaid
 credit cards backing the Google and AWS accounts. It hasn't cost much
 money yet (a little over $2.00 total when I checked last week), but it
 will increase as we get more users. So we probably won't end up with a
 dozen meeks in the list, because there's non-negligible cost to establish
 each one.

 > Also, instead of ordering the elements alphabetically, maybe it would be
 better to put obfs3 on top (since it's recommended). Then put fte, and
 then meek and finally flashproxy? I'm suggesting this because putting
 obfs3 on top might be more intuitive to users, and also because that's the
 order I would probably want to try my transports if I was censored.

 That's probably the ordering I would use too.

 > > Maybe we ship one default and return other backends through BridgeDB?
 >
 > Yes, that could also be an option. But which one? We only have 50GB for
 free in cloudfront, and google is blocked in China.

 Eventually we're going to have to find a way to fund the CDN accounts (and
 a bigger bridge to put behind them) anyway. Google probably works
 everywhere except China. Amazon probably works everywhere, but I'm a bit
 less confident in the long-term unblockability of a0.awsstatic.com as a
 front than I am in www.google.com.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12777#comment:6>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs