Commit 4174bf9c authored by Roger Dingledine's avatar Roger Dingledine
Browse files

resolve references


svn:r3521
parent 7740a687
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
+15 −15
Changes for doc/design-paper/challenges.tex: 15 added lines, 15 removed lines.
Original line number Diff line number Diff line
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
\begin{abstract}

We describe our experiences with deploying Tor, a low-latency anonymous
communication system that has been funded both by the U.S.~government
communication system that has been funded both by the U.S.~Navy
and also by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Because of its simplified threat model, Tor does not aim to defend
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ who don't want to reveal information to their competitors, and law
enforcement and government intelligence agencies who need
to do operations on the Internet without being noticed.

Tor research and development has been funded by the U.S. Navy, for use
Tor research and development has been funded by the U.S.~Navy, for use
in securing government
communications, and also by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, for use
in maintaining civil liberties for ordinary citizens online. The Tor
@@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ to join the network.

Tor is not the only anonymity system that aims to be practical and useful.
Commercial single-hop proxies~\cite{anonymizer}, as well as unsecured
open proxies around the Internet~\cite{open-proxies}, can provide good
open proxies around the Internet, can provide good
performance and some security against a weaker attacker. Dresden's Java
Anon Proxy~\cite{web-mix} provides similar functionality to Tor but only
handles web browsing rather than arbitrary TCP\@. Also, JAP's network
@@ -250,8 +250,8 @@ seems overkill (and/or insecure) based on the threat model we've picked.

Tor does not attempt to defend against a global observer.  Any adversary who
can see a user's connection to the Tor network, and who can see the
corresponding connection as it exits the Tor network, can use the timing
correlation between the two connections to confirm the user's chosen
corresponding connection as it exits the Tor network, can use timing
correlation to confirm the user's chosen
communication partners.  Defeating this attack would seem to require
introducing a prohibitive degree of traffic padding between the user and the
network, or introducing an unacceptable degree of latency (but see
@@ -380,9 +380,9 @@ Mixminion, where the threat model is based on mixing messages with each
other, there's an arms race between end-to-end statistical attacks and
counter-strategies~\cite{statistical-disclosure,minion-design,e2e-traffic,trickle02}.
But for low-latency systems like Tor, end-to-end \emph{traffic
confirmation} attacks~\cite{danezis-pet2004,SS03,defensive-dropping}
correlation} attacks~\cite{danezis-pet2004,SS03,defensive-dropping}
allow an attacker who watches or controls both ends of a communication
to use statistics to correlate packet timing and volume, quickly linking
to use statistics to match packet timing and volume, quickly linking
the initiator to her destination. This is why Tor's threat model is
based on preventing the adversary from observing both the initiator and
the responder.
@@ -742,7 +742,7 @@ transport a greater variety of protocols.
Though Tor has always been designed to be practical and usable first
with as much anonymity as can be built in subject to those goals, we
have contemplated that users might need resistance to at least simple
traffic confirmation attacks.  Higher-latency mix-networks resist these
traffic correlation attacks.  Higher-latency mix-networks resist these
attacks by introducing variability into message arrival times in order to
suppress timing correlation.  Thus, it seems worthwhile to consider the
whether we can improving Tor's anonymity by introducing batching and delaying
@@ -796,7 +796,7 @@ Section~\ref{subsec:tcp-vs-ip}). Instead, batch timing would be obscured by
synchronizing batches at the link level, and there would
be no direct attempt to synchronize all batches
entering the Tor network at the same time.
%Alternatively, if end-to-end traffic confirmation is the
%Alternatively, if end-to-end traffic correlation is the
%concern, there is little point in mixing.
%   Why not?? -NM
It might also be feasible to
@@ -811,11 +811,11 @@ mid-latency option; however, we should continue the caution with which
we have always approached padding lest the overhead cost us too much
performance or too many volunteers.

The distinction between traffic confirmation and traffic analysis is
The distinction between traffic correlation and traffic analysis is
not as cut and dried as we might wish. In \cite{hintz-pet02} it was
shown that if data volumes of various popular
responder destinations are catalogued, it may not be necessary to
observe both ends of a stream to confirm a source-destination link.
observe both ends of a stream to learn a source-destination link.
This should be fairly effective without simultaneously observing both
ends of the connection. However, it is still essentially confirming
suspected communicants where the responder suspects are ``stored'' rather
@@ -1012,7 +1012,7 @@ leak the fact that Alice {\it sometimes} talks to Bob as it is to leak the times
when Alice is {\it actually} talking to Bob.)


One solution to this problem is to use ``helper nodes''~\cite{helpers}---to
One solution to this problem is to use ``helper nodes''~\cite{wright02,wright03}---to
have each client choose a few fixed servers for critical positions in her
circuits.  That is, Alice might choose some server H1 as her preferred
entry, so that unless the attacker happens to control or observe her
@@ -1345,8 +1345,8 @@ their country. These users try to find any tools available to allow
them to get-around these firewalls. Some anonymity networks, such as
Six-Four~\cite{six-four}, are designed specifically with this goal in
mind; others like the Anonymizer~\cite{anonymizer} are paid by sponsors
such as Voice of America to set up a network to encourage `Internet
freedom'~\cite{voice-of-america-anonymizer}. Even though Tor wasn't
such as Voice of America to set up a network to encourage Internet
freedom. Even though Tor wasn't
designed with ubiquitous access to the network in mind, thousands of
users across the world are trying to use it for exactly this purpose.
% Academic and NGO organizations, peacefire, \cite{berkman}, etc
@@ -1427,7 +1427,7 @@ servers, by reducing the interconnectivity of the nodes; later we can reduce
overhead associated withy directories, discovery, and so on.

By reducing the connectivity of the network we increase the total number of
nodes that the network can contain. Danezis~\cite{danezis-pet03} considers
nodes that the network can contain. Danezis~\cite{danezis-pets03} considers
the anonymity implications of restricting routes on mix networks, and
recommends an approach based on expander graphs (where any subgraph is likely
to have many neighbors).  It is not immediately clear that this approach will
+6 −0
Changes for doc/design-paper/tor-design.bib: 6 added lines, 0 removed lines.
Original line number Diff line number Diff line
@@ -1199,6 +1199,12 @@
   publisher = {O'Reilly Media},
}

@Misc{six-four,
  key =          {six-four},
  title =        {{The Six/Four System}},
  note =         {\url{http://sourceforge.net/projects/sixfour/}}
}

%%% Local Variables:
%%% mode: latex
%%% TeX-master: "tor-design"