[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tor-bugs] #9164 [Flashproxy]: Is Flashproxy pluggable transport really working? Tests, comments and questions

#9164: Is Flashproxy pluggable transport really working? Tests, comments and
questions
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
    Reporter:  Aymeric     |       Owner:  dcf   
        Type:  defect      |      Status:  closed
    Priority:  normal      |   Milestone:        
   Component:  Flashproxy  |     Version:        
  Resolution:  duplicate   |    Keywords:        
      Parent:              |      Points:        
Actualpoints:              |  
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------

Comment(by arlolra):

 Replying to [comment:7 Aymeric]:

 > What are the criteria to know if a node is supporting the websocket PT
 (>= v0.2.4.12 ?)?

 I'm not sure if you can query a node to see what pluggable transports it
 supports. In any case, there may only be as little as one. For testing
 purposes, I suggest you setup your own. See "How to run a relay",
 https://gitweb.torproject.org/flashproxy.git/blob/HEAD:/README#l100

 > Even when the facilitator will be protected, is this not an issue to get
 so easily users' IP addresses?

 Hiding the fact that a client wishes to use Tor is not part of the flash
 proxy threat model.  Also, as suggested above, the facilitator should be
 rate-limited to control how many client IPs are handed out to each
 requesting flash proxy. Please see the research paper,
 https://crypto.stanford.edu/flashproxy/flashproxy.pdf

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/9164#comment:8>
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