Re: [tor-bugs] #10893 [Pluggable transport]: ScrambleSuit spec improvements

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

#10893: ScrambleSuit spec improvements
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------
     Reporter:  yawning              |      Owner:  phw
         Type:  defect               |     Status:  needs_review
     Priority:  normal               |  Milestone:
    Component:  Pluggable transport  |    Version:
   Resolution:                       |   Keywords:  scramblesuit spec
Actual Points:                       |  Parent ID:
       Points:                       |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------
Changes (by phw):

 * status:  needs_information => needs_review


Comment:

 Replying to [comment:8 yawning]:
 > I think 4 (keep it vague) with a provision stating that "implementations
 SHOULD use a CSPRNG" would be the best out of of the options that you
 presented.  I agree that flow signatures being different between
 implementations is not necessarily a bad thing.

 Sounds good.  I updated the spec which hopefully fixes this ticket.

 > I could write a CTR_DRBG based on the AES code in obfsproxy if needed as
 well (I had to do that for obfsclient since there isn't a easy way to get
 separate CSPRNG instances out of OpenSSL).

 That sounds like a good medium-term thing to do.  In the short term, we
 might be OK with the current implementation.  I will open a dedicated
 ticket for CTR_DRBG.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/10893#comment:9>
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