Skip to content

GitLab

  • Projects
  • Groups
  • Snippets
  • Help
    • Loading...
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
    • Contribute to GitLab
  • Sign in
Trac
Trac
  • Project overview
    • Project overview
    • Details
    • Activity
  • Issues 246
    • Issues 246
    • List
    • Boards
    • Labels
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
  • Operations
    • Operations
    • Metrics
    • Incidents
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • Value Stream
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Members
    • Members
  • Activity
  • Create a new issue
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar

GitLab is used only for code review, issue tracking and project management. Canonical locations for source code are still https://gitweb.torproject.org/ https://git.torproject.org/ and git-rw.torproject.org.

  • Legacy
  • TracTrac
  • Issues
  • #2114

Closed
Open
Opened Oct 26, 2010 by Roger Dingledine@arma

Vidalia network map should distinguish circuit types

In Vidalia's network map we show circuits that Tor is building. That's great, but there are cases where it confuses users. In particular, some Tor circuits are 1-hop (for fetching directory information but also using a layer of encryption), and some are internal (for everything other than attaching exit streams). Many users are concerned by the one-hop circuits they see (thinking that Tor is planning to use them for exit streams), and a smaller but still significant number of users set ExcludeExitNodes and then freak out when Tor uses that node as the last hop in an internal (non-exit) circuit. I think both cases would be partially resolved by having Vidalia present the circuit list more clearly.

How would we do this? One option would be a "type" column in the circuit listing, where we describe each circuit as "directory", "exit", or "internal". Another option would be to have separate rows in the circuit listing: put all the exit circuits at the top under the heading "exit circuits", then "internal circuits" and the list of internal circuits, then finally all the 1-hop directory circuits with their own heading. I like option 2 slightly better. I wonder if there are still better approaches?

Vidalia can learn the circuit purpose via the controlport, from the (alas undocumented) "PURPOSE=" argument in circuit status. But I think we don't export other flags, like "build_state->onehop_tunnel". We should first change Tor so it exports these flags in a more usable way.

To upload designs, you'll need to enable LFS and have an admin enable hashed storage. More information
Assignee
Assign to
None
Milestone
None
Assign milestone
Time tracking
None
Due date
None
Reference: legacy/trac#2114