Delivery-Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2016 07:03:08 -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,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	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 65DC51E04A9;
	Sat, 19 Mar 2016 07:03:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B9F028407;
	Sat, 19 Mar 2016 11:03:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D63428371
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 11:02:58 +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 86OCwF4kFd9U for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Sat, 19 Mar 2016 11:02:58 +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 68EF424562
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 11:02:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
 (envelope-from <gno-or-talk-2@m.gmane.org>) id 1ahEeh-0007r0-Up
 for tor-talk@lists.torproject.org; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 12:02:51 +0100
Received: from destiny.enn.lu ([94.242.246.23])
 by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
 id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 12:02:51 +0100
Received: from o.wendel by destiny.enn.lu with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
 id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 12:02:51 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
From: Oskar Wendel <o.wendel@wp.pl>
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2016 11:02:44 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <ncjbkj$tfr$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <nci43k$3ee$1@ger.gmane.org>
 <CAJVRA1SOk_FBO7wXi_tHbFzfPdG21KK5M++45iGcv9tJ8uRs3A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160319034044.GQ8732@moria.seul.org>
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: destiny.enn.lu
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Traffic shaping attack
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

Roger Dingledine <arma@mit.edu>:

> One of the questions to ask is how many points you need to watch in order
> to be in a position to launch the attack. This is where Tor fares better
> than centralized approaches like VPNs or single-hop proxies, and it's
> Tor's best line of defense here.

Let's assume that the service is extremely popular, with over 6 terabytes 
of traffic each day, and a gigabit port almost constantly saturated. Then, 
we can observe a small handset of guards and still be able to spot at 
least some users.

> Another question to ask is whether there will be false positives in the
> statistics, i.e. how often your analysis says "yes, match" when actually
> it's mistaken.

Well, for one traffic hiccup probably many. For constant interruptions in 
specified time frames, probably not many, if any. I mean, if you download 
a file that is big enough to cause many of these interruptions, I think no 
other traffic would meet this pattern.

> The third question you might ask is: can I inject these signals in a
> way that they're still recognizable to me, but observers don't realize
> that anything weird is going on with the traffic? That is, can I do
> this active traffic modulation attack but still be undetectable?

Some observers will realize and stay safe, but some people will not 
realize and get caught...

This is not a theoretic attack. This is something that has been noticed 
on one of illegal sites and I expect many busts around the globe in the 
coming weeks.

> http://freehaven.net/anonbib/#ndss09-rainbow
> http://freehaven.net/anonbib/#ndss11-swirl
> http://freehaven.net/anonbib/#pets13-flow-fingerprints

The swirl seems to describe just that...

- -- 
Oskar Wendel, o.wendel@wp.pl.REMOVE.THIS
Pubkey: https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=0x6690CC52318DB84C
Fingerprint: C8C4 B75C BB72 36FB 94B4 925C 6690 CC52 318D B84C
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJW7THNAAoJEGaQzFIxjbhMMM8IALvc0miX63zI+xIKlvliXnXs
NveIctCz2pxfeXthMZWbULtRWKPBvMqVdwlQ0SYc4FKpVENL0o+8/554b0WGAYV5
49+wyXFVtFhD+QLDpkiFuiybRTrZxDK6cSITPv987JWWQIJdZ9nTFUkxTTXqUjHa
9EHVibzlxMWivZl/eUpG3wqYiqyruHthH0+zbTovRtlO2uxTANqoGeXOgwxUyaYc
DbQWFHQ4onWsyM8vqU+pNsIo2k9a3Ns0SgX14GL+2Ml8T3QsbfE4cT8wML62KpIg
s1kGYURGCtgzA6QU6DVrUw2TF7phvPfkQHKIUleCIkoSFpTk7hxeH7haQbKXBvE=
=C9tj
-----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

