Delivery-Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2016 17:20:47 -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=-4.1 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 [138.201.14.202])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by khazad-dum.seul.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73CDF1E0056;
	Sun,  5 Jun 2016 17:20:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76B5FE07A4;
	Sun,  5 Jun 2016 21:20:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0423E0796
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sun,  5 Jun 2016 21:20:28 +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 e-uEIxYcv76C for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Sun,  5 Jun 2016 21:20:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-yw0-x229.google.com (mail-yw0-x229.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::229])
 (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 551DBE0793
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sun,  5 Jun 2016 21:20:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-yw0-x229.google.com with SMTP id c127so124830548ywb.1
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sun, 05 Jun 2016 14:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
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;
 bh=+4xFGGcV4eey0xnMY+6si14ao/15SQIuIxuySgqNa6g=;
 b=IAH/3KyyunpF6b8dn/HT1HJKvQniIt++WxO/kcbx4TQv4bpuDl75IzTdV7GwjU0qIU
 vb/02xI8LaUSNcnzgLUIRUNIXT+3pUDtZeOslJo/M+64/s+vw6DnMNhcJawJw6+9Ji7/
 8l1mkYCPUNf9lpRbeRIJyzG/fVguxdlX+skMwJw010DNgen6ZKO/KqeSYVVARJHfxDcr
 3OWQTfUgV3+pO2S+FT+MAO2+f0Q6k7TCGn2WDQoR/Rt497zAUezlXC+D+nNkehAIm7JQ
 CDAsbxGVuDjpqH76x+NL/SRA5EyoZHeHay2eVavEtwEoYdg/UAhRzWnZyQ/tXZjRVOlA
 gthg==
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;
 bh=+4xFGGcV4eey0xnMY+6si14ao/15SQIuIxuySgqNa6g=;
 b=NDQCm6irWoibKKxGCpWfDKtgtA4z+NKJM3mZldkJa3XmF3TrUDGGl4a1mAq7s4gYU5
 rSQX4VbX8GIpIEyvIVMpQCIMiBt1WbJF70UQUPPsiofM2538VWnYcwlC14LIzeUDNMQ5
 07A2K13z+n5QjvUYpZ9fBXaNDNfidhx1pUJuBGDS8HnPtCL7+9M0RIvoRQAMUY+0jvEI
 zxoKKpFo1LdUpQg8mI0TsdQmEPIU8fJHTywH6l/DtPff5T4VleLFagzMGhAxq/JRvVvw
 f8y2rNYsJjnRDBpOlZGnT0dRdna4QLMfKtmRnqBXnpv831nMVABBmv3OfpJPBEOGZM46
 Hm/w==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIiNYGZEsb1bPYgdnTvwa0eNfqY1XBe3jWIJIsOrSMAmbLvOiV5FHCYK3mrYKTL7L6GhBqvv9acZLjJHQ==
X-Received: by 10.129.165.135 with SMTP id c129mr10190045ywh.67.1465161625208; 
 Sun, 05 Jun 2016 14:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.129.145.18 with HTTP; Sun, 5 Jun 2016 14:20:24 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6439b26156f03f3f6a51e170b5b9fbe3@riseup.net>
References: <8554176B-F17B-4FC6-AFBA-29DA392E4B28@riseup.net>
 <CAD2Ti29UX8dZxz_McuC8GAaigWXgeAbWZR=QZBDfhLLP7Y_RtQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <6439b26156f03f3f6a51e170b5b9fbe3@riseup.net>
From: Allen <allenpmd@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2016 17:20:24 -0400
Message-ID: <CAB7TAMn9hWwZ0qHstbPqPwC6q=38EtNYWu0DO8Be_s27r-_g8w@mail.gmail.com>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] A possible solution to traffic correlation attacks,
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>

>
> So randomizing the times that traffic enters the network and exits the
> network wouldn't work? Like it enters a note and 30 ms after received or
> another random delay couldn't it exit. It would be harder to correlate the
> traffic right?


IMO, the packets would probably need to be randomly delayed at each node,
not just entering and exiting the network.  A mathematical model would be
needed to determine the necessary amount of delay (I doubt 30 ms would be
enough).  The delay could be chosen by the originating node, so it could
chose the privacy vs latency tradeoff.

It might also be beneficial to have two channels to each exit node, with
each channel used in only one direction, i.e., outbound packets travel one
route, while inbound packets travel a different route.
-- 
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

