Delivery-Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:55:08 -0500
Return-Path: <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on moria.seul.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID,
	URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Original-To: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-To: archiver@seul.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (eugeni.torproject.org [38.229.72.13])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by khazad-dum.seul.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4938D1E04EC
	for <archiver@seul.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:55:07 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B067321F2;
	Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:55:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2640321E4
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:54:58 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at 
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (eugeni.torproject.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id lqzKXDIYzFrc for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:54:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ig0-x22e.google.com (mail-ig0-x22e.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22e])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8D44321E3
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:54:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ig0-f174.google.com with SMTP id hn15so8963368igb.1
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 08:54:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=googlemail.com; s=20120113;
 h=from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
 :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=6KOXHqSO5rUnPJf2Go+qbcxgOmiMJmQvmQ3Umjd+5UM=;
 b=QqK/mj64WaFCfwkwPnqBczdrCGn0RfEPo9PXSex2rbdgJTG6/jj5xoJjBEIZzpl2Fo
 tCImOokhWmN5BXMmV7DXV1CMiqId+8DbX0+nLLLioe2bSxTRUw3Uf4kAFixoFva5o7SK
 VpYx+nSusFksmwLldcMGfSalYkHU2f6QKWgTO7WEL2ZS0PEFumkmHFybxHQjQ7vyBaLn
 wn8gXZG3Ts+dcWBmHaBW03lIxNn/MwrEDW+cAziRTpGsSX/WghiQsXm9K/vjFWiiwBVb
 pF66R+znvKKwfmz0huy8tPJmGJeTaJ1hWPSBqr5000HaQXXL6Ug3ZeOtD7Om4GGamrXB
 92NA==
X-Received: by 10.107.162.67 with SMTP id l64mr40490872ioe.14.1419612896151;
 Fri, 26 Dec 2014 08:54:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.10] ([95.90.206.100])
 by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id m127sm14213237ioe.32.2014.12.26.08.54.55
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
 Fri, 26 Dec 2014 08:54:55 -0800 (PST)
From: a <akademiker1@googlemail.com>
X-Google-Original-From: a <akademiker1@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <549D92DD.7030501@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 17:54:53 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
References: <20141219221905.GU8030@moria.seul.org>
 <54988708.9070806@riseup.net> <20141222211839.GF8014@moria.seul.org>
 <54989935.1020307@riseup.net> <5498A00C.70301@enn.lu>
 <5498A643.3070408@riseup.net> <549D3159.5080008@copper.net>
In-Reply-To: <549D3159.5080008@copper.net>
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Possible upcoming attempts to disable the Tor network
X-BeenThere: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
List-Id: "all discussion about theory, design,
 and development of Onion Routing" <tor-talk.lists.torproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/>
List-Post: <mailto:tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org
Sender: "tor-talk" <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>

Updateable list: one single party has keys to make Tor work or not work
Hardcoded list: lots of repos of different OS are responsible for their
users' Tor to work


Jim wrote:
> Thomas White wrote:
>> Generally some criteria for DirAuths are people who are trusted by the
>> community, aren't raided very often/have legal troubles/could be
>> legally compromised, people with an extensive understanding of how Tor
>> works and people who can secure their systems from attacks. Remember
>> every time a dirauth is added or change IP a new tor version must be
>> released as they are hardcoded so it isn't a simple process to add a
>> new one, not to mention intra-dirauth communication and verification.
> 
> I don't know about the intra-dirauth communication, but as far as the
> directory authorities being hard coded, would it make sense to put them
> in a small configuration file instead?  If for some reason it is deemed
> undesirable to allow users to alter that file, there could be a
> requirement the file be signed with one or more private keys and have
> the corresponding public keys hardcoded into the code.  It would be much
> easier and cheaper to distribute a new, small, signed configuration file
> than to release and distribute a whole new version of tor.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

