Delivery-Date: Fri, 01 Jan 2016 14:31:56 -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=1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS,RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB,
	T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no 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 7E3381E093E;
	Fri,  1 Jan 2016 14:31:54 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65C2537057;
	Fri,  1 Jan 2016 19:31:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6697536FAE
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri,  1 Jan 2016 19:31:46 +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 0HGPNczGjtwJ for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Fri,  1 Jan 2016 19:31:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33A89242C4
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri,  1 Jan 2016 19:31:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
 (envelope-from <gno-or-talk-2@m.gmane.org>) id 1aF5QL-0004Xt-Fr
 for tor-talk@lists.torproject.org; Fri, 01 Jan 2016 20:31:41 +0100
Received: from ll-static-085-016-128-244.ewe-ip-backbone.de ([85.16.128.244])
 by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
 id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 01 Jan 2016 20:31:41 +0100
Received: from o.wendel by ll-static-085-016-128-244.ewe-ip-backbone.de with
 local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 01 Jan 2016 20:31:41 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
From: Oskar Wendel <o.wendel@wp.pl>
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2016 19:31:35 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <n66k6n$hmd$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <34e1536b62d7b9ce1ba867f0fa59c8@cweb20.nm.nhnsystem.com>
 <1705812.7vP645ThCe@home> <n62t6i$c5o$1@ger.gmane.org>
 <4487129.Pq0bu5ingc@home> <20151231140606.GG27095@mail2.eff.org>
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ll-static-085-016-128-244.ewe-ip-backbone.de
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Hello I have a few question about 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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
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>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Seth David Schoen <schoen@eff.org>:

> As I said in my previous message, I don't think this is the case because
> the correlation just requires seeing the two endpoints of the connection,
> even without knowing the complete path.

Is it possible to be sure that one of these connecting clients is in fact 
a client and not just intermediate relay in the circuit?

How many relays with guard flag are there? What is the percentage of 
relays with guard flag set in population of all relays?

Recently there was a bug corrected (#17772) when all relays were treated 
like entry guards, while only relays with a guard flag should be treated 
like entry guards. Correcting this bug obviously made "entry guard pool" 
smaller. Can it make correlation attack easier, as now the attacker has 
a smaller pool (only relays with the guard flag) to consider and it's 
more probable that client will connect to a relay controlled or observed 
by the attacker?

- -- 
Oskar Wendel, o.wendel@wp.pl.REMOVE.THIS
Pubkey at https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=0x6690CC52318DB84C
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWhtQVAAoJEGaQzFIxjbhMwvYH/ioliWR+AtgoYa6+H0x1cWQE
goOfHFT+z/GLQyMsIpfk102xznAGHLrpcCVH6Jek3D8RS66G1c3CRD58m2YjEt4j
yduJ6gUP87mOluwHQP4nfpq75riAMMFUhpFZonVLtUyKfmZiem9C6U7BJjPCoU1Q
Jy5SJx6khpoGpBIY8SWlwEvQ86+n2+lO/gTZQ5Ve+5Yt38u6UXvRi5BzBuqFMfqa
r4MctjxyQe0SEkhfp9TwDNtlvS0SnZkG+vLFHRGTn1afP+JJeKkUXC0VnM7jrhOo
/iMQXK6MGkmQg+/jDfepVQjx+EmJpIDBDozTo9jEUD0LvluHEn0qcqGpBdqLwHA=
=Nbm1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
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

