Delivery-Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 23:19:31 -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=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID 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 9058B1E067B;
	Tue,  4 Nov 2014 23:19:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57EEA316BF;
	Wed,  5 Nov 2014 04:19:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7255531643
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Wed,  5 Nov 2014 04:19:19 +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 buIomeENLm44 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Wed,  5 Nov 2014 04:19:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from s2.netcompartner.com
 (lbthomsen-3-pt.tunnel.tserv6.fra1.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f0a:10f2::2])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C35931636
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Wed,  5 Nov 2014 04:19:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ncpws04.localnet (ncpws04.netcompartner.com
 [IPv6:2001:470:ec48:0:e2cb:4eff:fe3e:11c6])
 by s2.netcompartner.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 00CABC0531
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Wed,  5 Nov 2014 05:19:15 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;
 d=reclaim-your-privacy.com; s=2014; t=1415161155;
 bh=91H8G8d7wOBwg2H+mFXv5T7IXcS+Sl17zcN2cBpHnWY=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=YqPtgvvkjFmB7T3DWmcQQF7rrVfWEQKwOYyAWUXXK/E80s1Bn5FXupCQqTzmlGoqG
 hlEjHs9CZz73UkkMFTpxhFlV08OvS4ikP0hNwcJ6SIBs5EVIGCsbq4mjKsbIQoFYaJ
 XXGHAkrveVF/pfuoSqNl9/uQKCmfPcmF+SmIObW0N8NQoTl48C8t50HvgPpp6sbT7e
 H4telI2uhIYedu1GJa33AHxHnNSToJKnUvejU3KY7cera6Cx4xERIFBn/RDHlRjCKI
 1erXUk2Qta9EbdYU7+0YEY514/ZPWswkO+MMH07c380FTXJdLfmhm/8VH8gptjbcbr
 YgL8CRFLFoCYQ==
From: Lars Boegild Thomsen <lth@reclaim-your-privacy.com>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:19:03 +0800
Message-ID: <3413830.AxW13VOK2Y@ncpws04>
Organization: Reclaim Your Privacy
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.1 (Linux/3.16-3-amd64; KDE/4.14.1; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CAJVRA1THJ5urkXWVe7UgKVy5gA=1a6yQ4F1_=1v3m4Yu-pgxJw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7488606.2oxgLGVBPl@ncpws04> <8791008.gPgc6LIrom@ncpws04>
 <CAJVRA1THJ5urkXWVe7UgKVy5gA=1a6yQ4F1_=1v3m4Yu-pgxJw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Cloak Tor Router
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>

On Sunday 02 November 2014 00:47:40 coderman wrote:
> even a simple one time, "You are about to route your traffic over the
> Tor network. Turn off your torrents and don't upgrade poorly written
> applications".
> 
> the zero guidance to unsuspecting is what i am most concerned about;
> even basic captive portal warning would be a benefit.

I will definitely look into this one.  This should be quite easy to implement by messing a bit with the firewall tables :)

Only problem I see is that to make it useful I think it would have to time out at some point.  One example I have bought up a few times is my cheap and rather chatty media player.  I have not dug into the details exactly but I _know_ it "phones home" regularly and it is definitely a use case where the Tor browser bundle would be impossible.  Problem is that one is unattended so if I were to do a captive portal kind of page and that would require a positive acceptance, the Cloak would be useless for this scenario.

Number of wireless networks are not an issue so I _am_ beginning to think that more than two is necessary.  For example:

1. Open - Open network - no Tor
2. Transparent proxy - all tcp traffic allowed - forced through Tor - everything on separate circuits  - captive warning
3. Transparent proxy as 2 minus captive portal (for gadgets or someone who know what they are doing)
4. Isolating proxy - only https allowed - forced through Tor - everything on separate circuits and everything else blocked

It is not really a problem to make more than two so if this makes the Cloak more flexible I'd say it's the way to go.

-- 
Lars Boegild Thomsen
https://reclaim-your-privacy.com
Jabber/XMPP: lth@reclaim-your-privacy.com
-- 
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

