Delivery-Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 18:56:42 -0400
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=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,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 8C3FD1E0A6B
	for <archiver@seul.org>; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 18:56:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D57052FE18;
	Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:56:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5C3F2F6E0
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:51:24 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eugeni.torproject.org
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 CIj9BcncE9Ls for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:51:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mout.gmx.com (mout.gmx.com [74.208.4.200])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 893C52F6B3
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:51:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([99.190.181.188]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmxus001)
 with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MWBtH-1XAWf221EX-00XNvh for
 <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 00:51:21 +0200
Message-ID: <53A8AF52.9000008@gmx.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 17:50:58 -0500
From: Joe Btfsplk <joebtfsplk@gmx.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
References: <53A85FDD.5080407@gmx.com> <53A886AF.8070102@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <53A886AF.8070102@gmail.com>
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:W/eb5NFUYPJkTCN5B4hI/3Yj0aJKBh5gaMoHa7VDXA1CXev2PrC
 4bRUiqq6L66QsAbIhwj6jGDhdzNMm5kImk8ecFk2aG8YR9mUxzu3ocihlYF3uLGgPWx/ETz
 uHieRJcWOATp3NQooEZYGguzFGtZEVNoWFXpXSqU/A57YIo5tX+6G2ryyZUadhBVgiISmTJ
 tEUXzmg7/5il2LDMgPjJQ==
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Importance of individual useragent items
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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org
Sender: "tor-talk" <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>

On 6/23/2014 2:57 PM, Jeremy Rand wrote:
> On 06/23/2014 12:11 PM, Joe Btfsplk wrote:
>> I noticed there are at least 2 different references in Torbrowser for
>> useragent over ride strings.
>>
>> The Panopticlick site picks up this one: "/Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1;
>> rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/24.0/," though there's another shown in
>> about:config: extensions.torbutton.useragent_override;Mozilla/5.0
>> (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/17.0.
>>
>> Aside from the fact there are 2 strings shown in about:config, the
>> string that Panopticlick detects shows Windows 7 (32 bit - I assume).
>>
>> Several Windows usage by version sites show Win 7 64 bit as much more
>> common.  If true, why doesn't Torbrowser use that in its useragent?
>>
>> The string in Torbrowser may be one of the most common setups? Some
>> "useragent info" sites show 64 bit OSes are more common in the string.
>> In my 1st visit to Panopticlick in a long time, using Torbrowser - it
>> showed
>>
>> Browser Characteristic:  User Agent
>> bits of identifying information:  6.73
>> one in x browsers have this value:  105.86
>> value: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/24.0
>>
>> For the useragent string alone, 1 in 106 is pretty low.
>>
> To my knowledge TorBrowser doesn't try to hide the fact that it's
> TorBrowser.  As long as all TorBrowsers are the same (which I assume is
> the case), then it shouldn't affect the anonymity set unless I'm mistaken.
>
Thanks.

Other than the fact that accessing sites comes from Tor exit nodes, they 
could easily spoof the useragent the same as one of the most popular 
strings.
That may / may not be of any value, depending on how many sites check 
for Tor exits.  Creating a set of only Tor users definitely limits the 
number of users to get lost among, especially at sites w/o many Tor users.

Maybe Tor devs aren't able to blend w/ general internet users, so the 
selected Torbrowser useragent isn't that important.
-- 
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

