Re: [tor-dev] PrivEX - Privacy

[Karsten Loesing <karsten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/06/14 20:54, Tariq Elahi wrote:
> tl;dr: We propose collecting data from exit nodes to improve the Tor
> network, using differential privacy and secure multiparty computation to
> do it in a privacy-sensitive manner.
> 
> 
> Hi tor-dev,
> 
> In the ongoing effort to make Tor faster, secure and more resilient,
> network data plays an important role. If we know how the network is
> being used, what its clients' needs are and the threats that it faces we
> can deal with these in an intelligent manner. While the Tor Project does
> collect some statistics from guards, it does not currently collect and
> share potentially sensitive exit statistics. This data includes
> destination statistics and client timing behaviour, among many other
> potentially interesting, but privacy sensitive, data points.
> 
> This reticence to collect data is due to the (well-founded) risk to
> clients and OR operators that this data could pose, such as correlation
> and coercion attacks. This is unfortunate since, as we observe above, in
> order to make improvements to the Tor network and its feature set, it
> would be beneficial to know what is going on inside it and with its users.
> 
> To that end, it would be great if we were able to learn about network
> and client trend data. Some concrete examples include circuit-level data
> volumes, guard traffic usage, lengths of internal buffers, and latencies
> at relays. Indeed, if it can be counted then we should be able to
> collect and report it in a privacy-preserving manner.
> 
> Which brings me to the reason for this email; I have had the good
> fortune to work with George Danezis at UCL and my supervisor Ian
> Goldberg at the University of Waterloo on coming up with a solution to
> this private data collection problem. We have created a system, PrivEx,
> that uses modern privacy-preserving techniques such as differential
> privacy and secure multiparty computation to address this thorny set of
> challenges; we have written up the details in a tech report that can be
> found here:http://cacr.uwaterloo.ca/techreports/2014/cacr2014-08.pdf  .

First of all, thanks for doing this research!  Having such a system in
place would be very useful.  If it can be done securely.

I don't feel competent enough to review the crypto parts in that report,
so I'll have to leave that to others on this list.

Just one question from taking a quick look over the report: how
resilient are the two designs to failing tally key servers?  It seems
that the plan is to have around 10 of those, which is about the number
of directory authorities.  And even those are sometimes having
difficulty producing a consensus every hour.  We even have a dedicated
service that watches out for problems with the consensus process.  So,
what if a subset of the tally key servers break temporarily or even
permanently?  I guess what I'm asking is how much coordination effort
does it take to run your system?  Would we need a new
tally-key-server-health service?

> We have also created implementations of the two variants of PrivEx as
> described in the tech report. We are currently putting in the finishing
> touches and will be releasing them soon as open source in a git repo.
> 
> We would like to start by rolling out our own PrivEx-enabled exits in
> the Tor network and begin collecting destination visit statistics. We
> expect that PrivEx will be generally useful to all exit operators and
> the Tor network in general but there is no requirement to deploy it
> everywhere. We hope to deploy PrivEx on a handful of exits during the
> June-August timeframe.
> 
> What we would really like in order of importance is 1) a design review
> of our proposal, 2) an implementation review would be nice (once we
> release it). We hope that these reviews will address the main concerns
> of the community at large as well as give it, and us, a measure of
> confidence that collecting data with PrivEx is inherently good and is
> being done in a responsible and intelligent manner. We anticipate that
> this would make PrivEx an attractive addition for the Tor Project and
> their data collection needs.

What's the timeline here?  You say that the code will be released soon,
that you hope to deploy exits during the June-August timeframe, and that
you're hoping to get some review on design and implementation.  In what
order will these things happen?  Stated differently: will people have
sufficient time to look out for implementation flaws before you deploy
your exits?

> Please don't hesitate to give us your feedback, either to the list or to
> me via email.

Thanks for announcing your plans here in advance!

All the best,
Karsten

_______________________________________________
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev