7 ms·

Putting the "Tor" back in "Torrent" with Hidden Services and Popcorn Time

107 points by obvio171 12y ago

erkose 12y ago
Have you seen what telehash.org is doing?
- obvio171 12y ago
  Hadn't heard of it, thanks for the link! Seems like it doesn't protect metadata though, does it?
  - erkose 12y ago
    What metadata are you referring to?
    - obvio171 12y ago
      Which peers are connected to which, for example.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
catern 12y ago
Neat idea, but the onion routing in Tor is quite slow. You might consider cjdns instead for better performance and scalability. http://cjdns.info/ http://cjdns.info/
- obvio171 12y ago
  Is there any kind of connection privacy on cjdns? I'm not too familiar. With labels/studios spying on trackers/peers to go after downloaders, it's important to have that added security.
  - ianlevesque 12y ago
    Not really no, just plausible deniability that traffic didn't actually come from you. Cjdns (or really the only deployed cjdns network Hyperboria) also encourages knowing who you connect to somewhat personally. It's not yet (ever?) suitable for widespread anonymous deployment.
- zz1 12y ago
  The idea that Tor is slow is widely spread but absolutely inaccurate. In my experience, in the last two years Tor isn't slow, and the bottleneck seems to be my Internet Provider. People I know used Tor uploading files at more than 10 MBps.
orik 12y ago
I actually agree this would be a great way to add capacity to the Tor network if implemented in the way described. I'd love to hear if anyone else has thoughts on something like this or if anyone know if something like this has been attempted before.
- synchronise 12y ago
  This is exactly the same way how I2P propagates its network, each peer is also a relay. However, he should have used I2P, it's much more suited towards this project than Tor ever will be.
obvio171 12y ago
Btw, seems like Popcorn Time got removed from Github because of DMCA. Is that valid? The code wasn't pirated, so how does that make sense?
- kevin_thibedeau 12y ago
  It can be viewed as a copyright circumvention "device". If they published the code in a book like was done with PGP it could be viewed has having a legitimate existence as a physical work.
- habitue 12y ago
  One of the hurdles for a technology is having "substantial non-infringing uses" which may be arguable (are there enough open-source movie torrents out there?), but it's unlikely GitHub felt like figuring it out and just took it down when a complaint came in.
synchronise 12y ago
This is basically exactly what I2P does automatically. Each peer is also a router, so that point is covered. It already has a well documented method of transmitting torrents over the protocol, unlike Tor. I2P has dedicated .maggot links too for distributing files over that network. It uses garlic routing too, which makes it even more difficult to discover hidden services through network saturation. So by all accounts, I2P is the better network to choose for this, it has all the resources there and a community that's willing to help. But you decided to go down the unsupported route with Tor, a route that's going to be very unpopular with the Tor community.
- obvio171 12y ago
  That's great to hear! I haven't decided anything, I'm just more familiar with Tor and thought this would be something interesting to do with it. I'm not even building anything really, just getting feedback on the idea. I don't see any antagonism between the two, and I'm glad to know there's something being done with I2P already, will check it out. A Popcorn Time dev got in touch and showed interest in the idea, so it could be a great opportunity for the I2P community: https://twitter.com/xaiki/status/487732035331842048 https://twitter.com/xaiki/status/487732035331842048. You should get in touch with them, I'd be thrilled to see this happen!
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - synchronise 12y ago
    I fully support this venture with I2P, since the infrastructure is pretty much already there. I'm not an experienced programmer, more tinkering than anything, but I suggest that you pass these messages onto some of the I2P devs on Twitter (@i2p, @echelon and @str4d would be able to help you the best with this). I'm actually trying to bundle I2P with a portable version of Seamonkey with less than exciting results. I was also hoping that there would be some open source equivalent to Bittorrent Surf available to bundle too, however the only plugin that's similar apparently uses a proprietary network.
esbranson 12y ago
I sure wish Tor would absorb the best of I2P.
kijin 12y ago
Will this also be able to connect to non-Tor peers (via exit nodes)? One of the biggest problems for any peer-to-peer technology is the chicken-and-egg problem. You need to bring together a large number of users in a short time, or else everyone abandons your product because none of the friends/files/etc. they want are on the network. A BitTorrent client that can only connect to Tor-enabled peers is therefore doomed from the beginning. You need to be able to connect to all the existing non-Tor peers without compromising your own anonymity, while also providing plenty of incentives for other nodes to switch to Tor (i.e. presumed immunity from the MAFIAA). Maybe after 10 years when everyone is anonymous, then you can drop this "compatibility layer" and go entirely dark. For a similar reason, I support your decision to use Tor instead of I2P. The latter's design might be easier to integrate into a BitTorrent client, but the former has many more users and much greater network capacity, is backed by an organization that will fight to the death to protect its integrity, and above all, just happens to be much better known.
- synchronise 12y ago
  The latter's network capacity scales up with each new user due to its design, which is far more efficient than the separate client-relay design that Tor uses. And simply because Tor has the benefit of a greater pool of users doesn't mean that the network would benefit from the addition of this program. Tor is already being extensively used in other ways and the network is quite congested already. The addition of this extra data, plus from the scores of users that will strip out their relay to increase bandwidth for them, will make Tor a less attractive option for what it's being used for currently. It should be noted that Vuze (Azareus) has a comprehensive guide on how to get their program working with I2P, and it also allows the user to mix torrents from both I2P and the clearnet, so such transitional software packages are possible and do exist. EDIT: There is also an issue which arises when you run a relay on a hidden service. https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2014-July/033819.html https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2014-July/03...
  - kijin 12y ago
    OP's proposal is not just to add bandwidth-heavy clients to the Tor network, it is to add a large number of relays by making every BitTorrent client a Tor relay. OP also devotes two long sections on why he thinks his program will not harm the rest of the Tor network. Sure, there are issues to overcome before this can become reality. But the Tor network has improved by leaps and bounds over the last few years, and there's no reason to be pessimistic about its ability to handle a lot more traffic. Sure, I2P already works reasonably well with BitTorrent. But what's wrong with trying to achieve a similar result with Tor?

107 points by obvio171 12y ago

erkose 12y ago

Have you seen what telehash.org is doing?

obvio171 12y ago
Hadn't heard of it, thanks for the link! Seems like it doesn't protect metadata though, does it?
- erkose 12y ago
  What metadata are you referring to?
  - obvio171 12y ago
    Which peers are connected to which, for example.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

catern 12y ago

Neat idea, but the onion routing in Tor is quite slow. You might consider cjdns instead for better performance and scalability. http://cjdns.info/ http://cjdns.info/

obvio171 12y ago
Is there any kind of connection privacy on cjdns? I'm not too familiar. With labels/studios spying on trackers/peers to go after downloaders, it's important to have that added security.
- ianlevesque 12y ago
  Not really no, just plausible deniability that traffic didn't actually come from you. Cjdns (or really the only deployed cjdns network Hyperboria) also encourages knowing who you connect to somewhat personally. It's not yet (ever?) suitable for widespread anonymous deployment.
zz1 12y ago
The idea that Tor is slow is widely spread but absolutely inaccurate. In my experience, in the last two years Tor isn't slow, and the bottleneck seems to be my Internet Provider. People I know used Tor uploading files at more than 10 MBps.

orik 12y ago

I actually agree this would be a great way to add capacity to the Tor network if implemented in the way described. I'd love to hear if anyone else has thoughts on something like this or if anyone know if something like this has been attempted before.

synchronise 12y ago
This is exactly the same way how I2P propagates its network, each peer is also a relay. However, he should have used I2P, it's much more suited towards this project than Tor ever will be.

obvio171 12y ago

Btw, seems like Popcorn Time got removed from Github because of DMCA. Is that valid? The code wasn't pirated, so how does that make sense?

kevin_thibedeau 12y ago
It can be viewed as a copyright circumvention "device". If they published the code in a book like was done with PGP it could be viewed has having a legitimate existence as a physical work.
habitue 12y ago
One of the hurdles for a technology is having "substantial non-infringing uses" which may be arguable (are there enough open-source movie torrents out there?), but it's unlikely GitHub felt like figuring it out and just took it down when a complaint came in.

synchronise 12y ago

This is basically exactly what I2P does automatically. Each peer is also a router, so that point is covered. It already has a well documented method of transmitting torrents over the protocol, unlike Tor. I2P has dedicated .maggot links too for distributing files over that network. It uses garlic routing too, which makes it even more difficult to discover hidden services through network saturation. So by all accounts, I2P is the better network to choose for this, it has all the resources there and a community that's willing to help. But you decided to go down the unsupported route with Tor, a route that's going to be very unpopular with the Tor community.

obvio171 12y ago
That's great to hear! I haven't decided anything, I'm just more familiar with Tor and thought this would be something interesting to do with it. I'm not even building anything really, just getting feedback on the idea. I don't see any antagonism between the two, and I'm glad to know there's something being done with I2P already, will check it out. A Popcorn Time dev got in touch and showed interest in the idea, so it could be a great opportunity for the I2P community: https://twitter.com/xaiki/status/487732035331842048 https://twitter.com/xaiki/status/487732035331842048. You should get in touch with them, I'd be thrilled to see this happen!
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- synchronise 12y ago
  I fully support this venture with I2P, since the infrastructure is pretty much already there. I'm not an experienced programmer, more tinkering than anything, but I suggest that you pass these messages onto some of the I2P devs on Twitter (@i2p, @echelon and @str4d would be able to help you the best with this). I'm actually trying to bundle I2P with a portable version of Seamonkey with less than exciting results. I was also hoping that there would be some open source equivalent to Bittorrent Surf available to bundle too, however the only plugin that's similar apparently uses a proprietary network.

esbranson 12y ago

I sure wish Tor would absorb the best of I2P.

kijin 12y ago

Will this also be able to connect to non-Tor peers (via exit nodes)? One of the biggest problems for any peer-to-peer technology is the chicken-and-egg problem. You need to bring together a large number of users in a short time, or else everyone abandons your product because none of the friends/files/etc. they want are on the network. A BitTorrent client that can only connect to Tor-enabled peers is therefore doomed from the beginning. You need to be able to connect to all the existing non-Tor peers without compromising your own anonymity, while also providing plenty of incentives for other nodes to switch to Tor (i.e. presumed immunity from the MAFIAA). Maybe after 10 years when everyone is anonymous, then you can drop this "compatibility layer" and go entirely dark. For a similar reason, I support your decision to use Tor instead of I2P. The latter's design might be easier to integrate into a BitTorrent client, but the former has many more users and much greater network capacity, is backed by an organization that will fight to the death to protect its integrity, and above all, just happens to be much better known.

synchronise 12y ago
The latter's network capacity scales up with each new user due to its design, which is far more efficient than the separate client-relay design that Tor uses. And simply because Tor has the benefit of a greater pool of users doesn't mean that the network would benefit from the addition of this program. Tor is already being extensively used in other ways and the network is quite congested already. The addition of this extra data, plus from the scores of users that will strip out their relay to increase bandwidth for them, will make Tor a less attractive option for what it's being used for currently. It should be noted that Vuze (Azareus) has a comprehensive guide on how to get their program working with I2P, and it also allows the user to mix torrents from both I2P and the clearnet, so such transitional software packages are possible and do exist. EDIT: There is also an issue which arises when you run a relay on a hidden service. https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2014-July/033819.html https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2014-July/03...
- kijin 12y ago
  OP's proposal is not just to add bandwidth-heavy clients to the Tor network, it is to add a large number of relays by making every BitTorrent client a Tor relay. OP also devotes two long sections on why he thinks his program will not harm the rest of the Tor network. Sure, there are issues to overcome before this can become reality. But the Tor network has improved by leaps and bounds over the last few years, and there's no reason to be pessimistic about its ability to handle a lot more traffic. Sure, I2P already works reasonably well with BitTorrent. But what's wrong with trying to achieve a similar result with Tor?