Delivery-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:39:04 -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=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,T_DKIM_INVALID,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
	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 CD70E1E06C4;
	Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:39:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AB7D39014;
	Wed, 20 Jan 2016 05:38:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE2A7391BD;
 Wed, 20 Jan 2016 05:38:33 +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 KYyeICZPhnsH; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 05:38:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ig0-x22b.google.com (mail-ig0-x22b.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22b])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEAB7391AD;
 Wed, 20 Jan 2016 05:38:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ig0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id z14so94319703igp.1;
 Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:38:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :cc:content-type;
 bh=OrPEXDP/gDVBm6sQOpv3HuCWB+zzp/F72jP6FdDlEpg=;
 b=pFF5YkArKEZGiLhexYH9YAWImdmdp2riUJhwHeMNtMlMtuD3C4C98ZpsGqlBJFdQ5f
 fCYNaUjJwZJ0CaWYEVV3kFeCyDjxHT8LQ7QaJHIWZsKcn7ApDRX+ZcdksdE55GMMCExG
 /+bDGmhb8KrsKIbHnaIBmFI4nBjv1SO+C2weYKbiMLnl71a9bEMLOQFhpSaGxwTdYDkj
 r0S7Gar6OkxQstprhQv91L9HDvceWDxP/oRDViBjNnYLokLj7Mj710VNq7p8Eys6Z66W
 IZTu7JEM4IHVX3BMe0ugrdEfJ6Bx0WJj475Gq7xIOzijubSomT79I1uwuQgfVUdfq1mV
 PepA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
 bh=OrPEXDP/gDVBm6sQOpv3HuCWB+zzp/F72jP6FdDlEpg=;
 b=gHGQ6O/evSGzvcGA3N0++Kvu2qU/mg/WljOrOISAxNiSF50h1AFiNaZ4O2TypJAA0g
 GiA0h8VcDjeKYD2TQvnIjzvhb3Uv6DeCBKk6cMfOhmzRUHcPInkxy/bYpMpt1xYOPd4Q
 Ryzd19cGs3aMEL+JI5DNLwP5V4UkGz1s/xZ+tLx7LpN0IVLZBSqN1QUpHKXX66Y7Sitn
 TWIWKg2mYwnQ4F8G3cTnAJF+O3NDGTOVHVMDgZLFrWpMknIRj064zSaOFohgOqrGAHvd
 H00nLExO66ZMLk7GkxsJ8xWZT+vsSAjCOrAZ3ovPUZBayooPvKp1sOdzYvIvKueKPd5P
 3l+g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YORQRXPDY00Jg+6EQAxqnxDObYSmLmmA/1bAZPETxUFgadFH+PqRS9x0hdPNS+zbmjOxzNohsR2xiw7dOQ==
X-Received: by 10.50.79.234 with SMTP id m10mr1756046igx.23.1453268311639;
 Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:38:31 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.36.137.197 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:37:52 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CADop2NEfs4yed6dUzdhoCgCCT=SVTdpf+_Scp+JvX=Euxy8wLQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADop2NEfs4yed6dUzdhoCgCCT=SVTdpf+_Scp+JvX=Euxy8wLQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:37:52 -0500
Message-ID: <CAD2Ti2_1trypK3sj6vqAiaYnaR2KW1tx016suJwA7egvWwf7yw@mail.gmail.com>
To: tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
Cc: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] [tor-dev] Is it possible to specify voluntary delays
	in my Tor client?
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>

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Virgil Griffith <i@virgil.gr> wrote:
> I.e., if I want the extra resistance to traffic analysis that higher latency
> connections provide, is there a way to specify that in my Tor config?

Higher latency, in and of itself, does not provide any resistance to
traffic analysis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latency_(engineering)

Higher global jitter might help, but circuit orientation at
guards and exits through to the clients seems to nullify that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jitter

For which an idea may to become packet switching, which
is really no longer Tor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packet_switching

Link padding seems the next real step but I've not put enough
reading to it, only have idea to read about. Nor do I yet review about
Tor padding proposal as sufficient or not, sorry.

As it is not the Tor original model design maybe some other
network will take this analysis / padding issue up before then.
I've no idea.
-- 
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

