5 ms·

.

jstanley 8y ago
Nothing has any defence against global traffic analysis. Tor still does better than anything else. I don't think it's worth scaring people away from using Tor, because whatever else they'd be using instead is certainly worse. EDIT: Parent comment originally said words to the effect of "Reminder that Tor has no defence against global traffic analysis".
- ddtaylor 8y ago
  I'm not against Tor but I think it's an important fact if we're going to discus how using multiple relays is a way to obfusticate traffic.
- zrm 8y ago
  > Nothing has any defence against global traffic analysis. It's possible to guard against global traffic analysis by establishing permanent fixed-bandwidth links between each node and sending traffic along them even when they aren't assigned to a circuit (or the circuit is idle). Then there is nothing to passively analyze because the amount of traffic between each node is always the same. The problem is that this consumes a very large amount of bandwidth.
  - owenmarshall 8y ago
    This works against global passive adversaries. If you instead ask yourself "how many Tor nodes are out there"[1], and then ask yourself "what is the NSA's annual budget"[2], the concept of a global active adversary makes me a bit nervous. [1]: http://torstatus.blutmagie.de http://torstatus.blutmagie.de [2]: https://www.theverge.com/2013/8/29/4672414/leaked-snowden-documents-reveal-details-of-surveillance-budget https://www.theverge.com/2013/8/29/4672414/leaked-snowden-do...
    - zrm 8y ago
      The scary thing about a global passive adversary is that the attack is undetectable. Active attacks are harder to defend against but they're also harder to keep secret.
  - bitminer 8y ago
    You may want to investigate i2p which is resistant to traffic analysis. And does not run 100%bandwidth all day and all night.
    - zrm 8y ago
      I think you're referring to traffic analysis for protocol identification, which is something else entirely, and Tor handles that as well. Resisting protocol identification can be done very efficiently -- you basically get the same information theoretical efficiency as the protocol you're mimicking does, and the primary failure mode is to not be mimicking it completely accurately. It's theoretically possible to mimic the target protocol perfectly, and each time someone finds a way to distinguish them is one step closer to there not being any more ways left. Resisting global traffic analysis for the purposes of deanonymization is not so easy. The issue is that if every time Alice sends ~476MB of traffic, Bob promptly receives ~476MB of traffic, it's not hard to deduce that Alice is talking to Bob. To fix that, the amount and timing of the traffic Bob receives needs to be independent of the traffic Alice is sending him. Which is possible but inherently comes at an efficiency cost.
      - mirimir 8y ago
        Well, first thing, you don't send many MB directly to someone. You put it on a Tor onion file-share site, and PM the link via Tor. Unless your adversary is lucky enough to pwn the guard for that onion site, they can't even see the correlation. I can imagine a global passive adversary that could log all Internet traffic, and make it searchable. The NSA can somewhat do that. But even the NSA can't retain everything for more than a few days, if even that. So even retaining necessary data for a match would be a stretch. Let alone having the processing power needed to do the matching.
        ddtaylor 8y ago
        > Unless your adversary is lucky enough to pwn the guard for that onion site, they can't even see the correlation. We're talking about an attacker that can see every byte going over the wire, encrypted or not it's still able to measure the volume of data itself. > Well, first thing, you don't send many MB directly to someone. You put it on a Tor onion file-share site, and PM the link via Tor. In that example the attacker wants to determine the location/IP of the hidden service itself. It's pretty well known that high traffic / volume hidden services are some of the easiest targets for global traffic analysis. > I can imagine a global passive adversary that could log all Internet traffic, and make it searchable. The NSA can somewhat do that. They don't have to log the data itself simply the meta data and in specific the volume of data sent between vertices in the graph. Various agencies have openly admitted they keep this information and it's not considered "protected" in their view. This is simply a graph analysis problem, similar to how Bitcoin is pseudo-anonymous unless you use specific methods that aren't built into the core protocol.
- craftkiller 8y ago
  What about i2p?
  - jstanley 8y ago
    I don't personally know anything about i2p but my spidey senses suggest that until it becomes about as widely-used as Tor, it's not going to have as good an anonymisation factor as Tor. I mean, if only 100 people use I2P, and some traffic has gone over I2P, you can quite easily narrow it down to the set of 100 people. I'd be delighted to be proved wrong.
    - ddtaylor 8y ago
      Also problematic is that from my understanding i2p is not used by any honest actors, since it doesn't have clearnet access. Tor is used by lots of people for honest things or at least less-than-completely-shady things like getting around IP blocks or geo-fencing whereas i2p is used exclusively for people that require perfect privacy for their communications.

Nothing has any defence against global traffic analysis. Tor still does better than anything else. I don't think it's worth scaring people away from using Tor, because whatever else they'd be using instead is certainly worse. EDIT: Parent comment originally said words to the effect of "Reminder that Tor has no defence against global traffic analysis".

ddtaylor 8y ago
I'm not against Tor but I think it's an important fact if we're going to discus how using multiple relays is a way to obfusticate traffic.
zrm 8y ago
> Nothing has any defence against global traffic analysis. It's possible to guard against global traffic analysis by establishing permanent fixed-bandwidth links between each node and sending traffic along them even when they aren't assigned to a circuit (or the circuit is idle). Then there is nothing to passively analyze because the amount of traffic between each node is always the same. The problem is that this consumes a very large amount of bandwidth.
- owenmarshall 8y ago
  This works against global passive adversaries. If you instead ask yourself "how many Tor nodes are out there"[1], and then ask yourself "what is the NSA's annual budget"[2], the concept of a global active adversary makes me a bit nervous. [1]: http://torstatus.blutmagie.de http://torstatus.blutmagie.de [2]: https://www.theverge.com/2013/8/29/4672414/leaked-snowden-documents-reveal-details-of-surveillance-budget https://www.theverge.com/2013/8/29/4672414/leaked-snowden-do...
  - zrm 8y ago
    The scary thing about a global passive adversary is that the attack is undetectable. Active attacks are harder to defend against but they're also harder to keep secret.
- bitminer 8y ago
  You may want to investigate i2p which is resistant to traffic analysis. And does not run 100%bandwidth all day and all night.
  - zrm 8y ago
    I think you're referring to traffic analysis for protocol identification, which is something else entirely, and Tor handles that as well. Resisting protocol identification can be done very efficiently -- you basically get the same information theoretical efficiency as the protocol you're mimicking does, and the primary failure mode is to not be mimicking it completely accurately. It's theoretically possible to mimic the target protocol perfectly, and each time someone finds a way to distinguish them is one step closer to there not being any more ways left. Resisting global traffic analysis for the purposes of deanonymization is not so easy. The issue is that if every time Alice sends ~476MB of traffic, Bob promptly receives ~476MB of traffic, it's not hard to deduce that Alice is talking to Bob. To fix that, the amount and timing of the traffic Bob receives needs to be independent of the traffic Alice is sending him. Which is possible but inherently comes at an efficiency cost.
    - mirimir 8y ago
      Well, first thing, you don't send many MB directly to someone. You put it on a Tor onion file-share site, and PM the link via Tor. Unless your adversary is lucky enough to pwn the guard for that onion site, they can't even see the correlation. I can imagine a global passive adversary that could log all Internet traffic, and make it searchable. The NSA can somewhat do that. But even the NSA can't retain everything for more than a few days, if even that. So even retaining necessary data for a match would be a stretch. Let alone having the processing power needed to do the matching.
      - ddtaylor 8y ago
        > Unless your adversary is lucky enough to pwn the guard for that onion site, they can't even see the correlation. We're talking about an attacker that can see every byte going over the wire, encrypted or not it's still able to measure the volume of data itself. > Well, first thing, you don't send many MB directly to someone. You put it on a Tor onion file-share site, and PM the link via Tor. In that example the attacker wants to determine the location/IP of the hidden service itself. It's pretty well known that high traffic / volume hidden services are some of the easiest targets for global traffic analysis. > I can imagine a global passive adversary that could log all Internet traffic, and make it searchable. The NSA can somewhat do that. They don't have to log the data itself simply the meta data and in specific the volume of data sent between vertices in the graph. Various agencies have openly admitted they keep this information and it's not considered "protected" in their view. This is simply a graph analysis problem, similar to how Bitcoin is pseudo-anonymous unless you use specific methods that aren't built into the core protocol.
craftkiller 8y ago
What about i2p?
- jstanley 8y ago
  I don't personally know anything about i2p but my spidey senses suggest that until it becomes about as widely-used as Tor, it's not going to have as good an anonymisation factor as Tor. I mean, if only 100 people use I2P, and some traffic has gone over I2P, you can quite easily narrow it down to the set of 100 people. I'd be delighted to be proved wrong.
  - ddtaylor 8y ago
    Also problematic is that from my understanding i2p is not used by any honest actors, since it doesn't have clearnet access. Tor is used by lots of people for honest things or at least less-than-completely-shady things like getting around IP blocks or geo-fencing whereas i2p is used exclusively for people that require perfect privacy for their communications.