Delivery-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 01:28:47 -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=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,
	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 9F6C81E01A6;
	Sun, 21 Jun 2015 01:28:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A4BA35575;
	Sun, 21 Jun 2015 05:28:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0780354FD
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sun, 21 Jun 2015 05:28:35 +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 RA-2CEU6QD55 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Sun, 21 Jun 2015 05:28:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from cock.li (cock.li [75.102.27.230])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD9F6354FA
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sun, 21 Jun 2015 05:28:35 +0000 (UTC)
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
References: <CAD2Ti2-xVw_W2YDqkdQHmcHyKBDQjfT5jvc-8m3EAU8UkqxrUA@mail.gmail.com>
From: "ncl@cock.li" <ncl@cock.li>
Message-ID: <55864B5C.6070509@cock.li>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 05:27:56 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAD2Ti2-xVw_W2YDqkdQHmcHyKBDQjfT5jvc-8m3EAU8UkqxrUA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Matryoshka: Are TOR holes intentional?
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>

grarpamp:
> http://shofarnexus.com/Blog-2015-01-13

Under "The hole in TOR":
> If you see a 456 byte message sent from computer A and a moment later
> the same or similar size message arrive at computer B you could draw
> an obvious conclusion.

But, Tor cells are a fixed-size of 512 bytes:
https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq#CellSize

Regarding timing attacks: doesn't the "natural" deviation in latency
over the internet, and the size of the tor network, make correlation a
bit more difficult (for short-lived connections at least)?
-- 
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

