Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-16 Thread Johan Nilsson
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 06:25:03PM -0400, Roger Dingledine wrote:
 The constraints are:
 * 100mbit+ connectivity, though in practice I expect they will spend
 most of their time doing far less than that.
 * No more than 2 bridges per /24. If you're running fast (100mbit+)
 exits (which is more important), exits on that /24 count toward this 2.
 * No more than 7 bridges total per data center.
 

Hi,

We are DFRI [0] and we intend to set up fast and stable bridges.

Some questions:
* How long lived do the IP addresses need to be in order to be
considered stable? 
* About the 100mbit connectivity, do we need to be able to sustain 
100mbit or is the ability to burst that good enough?
* Is it ok to run 2 bridges on the same address?


Kind regards
Johan Nilsson
DFRI
   
[0] https://dfri.se/index.en/
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-16 Thread Philipp Winter
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 09:51:03AM +0800, Lorenz Kirchner wrote:
 Yes, assuming the users would not give up out of frustration before :-) We
 can
 actually do the math: According to [0], at the moment the Tor network has
 an
 advertised bandwidth of 3000 MiB/s. Let's assume that all Chinese relays
 would
 account for 30 MiB/s. Even then, the probability of a Chinese relay being
 selected as first hop is only 30/3000 = 0.01 = 1%!

 How long does it take to make 100 circuit attempts?

That would depend on when your OS thinks, a TCP connection timed out. It could
be quite a while if you count several seconds for each connection attempt.

Philipp
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-15 Thread Philipp Winter
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:55:55AM +0800, Lorenz Kirchner wrote:
 I'm not a tor expert but I am in China and have been using tor... I brought
 this up before and I still feel that tor would benefit from having special
 (entry)relays inside the GFW that have a reliable link to relays outside the
 GFW. Clients inside GFW could then always connect to these relays. Actually,
 probably tens of thousands of people have VPN connections and they could host
 such relays to provide access to clients, even such that might be completely
 blocked from accessing addresses outside the GFW, which, sadly, that is not so
 uncommon either.

I guess, that would require a modification of the path selection on the clients
side. Usually, Tor clients randomly pick relays weighted by bandwidth. Unless
the Chinese relays would provide an enormous amount of bandwidth, they would
barely get selected by clients which leads to a poor user experience.

Perhaps it's better to focus on improved bridge distribution strategies [0] and
hard-to-block transport protocols [1]. Also, that would be a universal solution
which would also help in other countries and not a specific - and probably hard
to maintain - Chinese-only solution.

 Of course it would be great to reveal as little information as possible about
 such special relays in public... and continue to make the tor connections as
 un-conspicuous as possible

I guess, the firewall operators would notice that quite soon when Chinese relays
would start popping up in the consensus or am I missing something here? And as
soon as something is in the consensus, it's particularly easy to block.

 20 mbit fiber connections are rapidly becoming commonplace in China. VPNs are
 commonplace already and I think in the case of GFW the tor project could make
 use of this situation.

Aren't these 20 mbit only achievable with domestic traffic? I thought that
international traffic gets throttled a lot in China?

 I'd love to see some sort of an easy deployable tor relay package that could
 listen on both the chinese and vpn address and relay traffic between the 
 two...

For what it's worth, I and a few others are running bridges with the brdgrd tool
[1]. The tool rewrites the first announced window size of a bridge and hence
forces the client to split its cipher list in two halves. That way, the
firewall has not been able to recognize Tor so far. The handy thing is, it only
requires modification of bridges and not clients.

Philipp

[0] https://blog.torproject.org/blog/bridge-distribution-strategies
[1] https://www.torproject.org/docs/pluggable-transports.html.en
[2] https://github.com/NullHypothesis/brdgrd
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-15 Thread Lorenz Kirchner
I guess, that would require a modification of the path selection on the
 clients
 side. Usually, Tor clients randomly pick relays weighted by bandwidth.
 Unless
 the Chinese relays would provide an enormous amount of bandwidth, they
 would
 barely get selected by clients which leads to a poor user experience.


well compared to now the experience would be better, eventually the
reachable Chinese relays would connect it just might take a while on first
startup




 Perhaps it's better to focus on improved bridge distribution strategies
 [0] and
 hard-to-block transport protocols [1]. Also, that would be a universal
 solution
 which would also help in other countries and not a specific - and probably
 hard
 to maintain - Chinese-only solution.


I think the solution is not a Chinese only solution as it would work
anywhere where censorship actually exists




 I guess, the firewall operators would notice that quite soon when Chinese
 relays
 would start popping up in the consensus or am I missing something here?
 And as
 soon as something is in the consensus, it's particularly easy to block.


I am not sure how it works but I have a feeling that the firewall operators
have difficulties in blocking hosts inside their networks


 Aren't these 20 mbit only achievable with domestic traffic? I thought that
 international traffic gets throttled a lot in China?


my experience is that I can actually get *up to* 20 mbit of international
traffic, but realistically it is more like 10 mbit of reliable traffic,
still ok I feel... the gfw mostly causes latency, inside gfw i can get ping
times of around 4ms whereas ping through the VPN is about 250ms to the
westcoast of the US.. that ping time has an effect on throughput I guess
and also the bandwidth will can vary in what I guess are peak times..

Well if tor could provide a working system of bridges or whatever it would
be great, but at the moment the censors are ahead..

Loz
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-15 Thread Philipp Winter
Hi Loz,

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:00:11PM +0800, Lorenz Kirchner wrote:
 I guess, that would require a modification of the path selection on the
 clients
 side. Usually, Tor clients randomly pick relays weighted by bandwidth.
 Unless
 the Chinese relays would provide an enormous amount of bandwidth, they
 would
 barely get selected by clients which leads to a poor user experience.

 well compared to now the experience would be better, eventually the reachable
 Chinese relays would connect it just might take a while on first startup

Yes, assuming the users would not give up out of frustration before :-) We can
actually do the math: According to [0], at the moment the Tor network has an
advertised bandwidth of 3000 MiB/s. Let's assume that all Chinese relays would
account for 30 MiB/s. Even then, the probability of a Chinese relay being
selected as first hop is only 30/3000 = 0.01 = 1%!

 Perhaps it's better to focus on improved bridge distribution strategies [0]
 and
 hard-to-block transport protocols [1]. Also, that would be a universal
 solution
 which would also help in other countries and not a specific - and probably
 hard
 to maintain - Chinese-only solution.

 I think the solution is not a Chinese only solution as it would work anywhere
 where censorship actually exists

Only if you assume that the censor is always having a hard time censoring
content within its own borders. That might hold more-or-less true for China but
not everywhere else, right? For example, what about the networks of a company or
a small organization?

 I guess, the firewall operators would notice that quite soon when Chinese
 relays
 would start popping up in the consensus or am I missing something here? And
 as
 soon as something is in the consensus, it's particularly easy to block.

 I am not sure how it works but I have a feeling that the firewall operators
 have difficulties in blocking hosts inside their networks 

That might be due to the fact that a lot of filtering (but not all of it) is
going on in border ASes. There even is a research paper about that if you are
interested [1].

However, there still remains a legal problem! You will have a hard time hiding
the fact that you are operating a relay within China. And if this turns out to
be a viable strategy, even more so. I suppose it wouldn't be too hard for the
government to simply confiscate or shut down Chinese relays?

After all, I agree with you that it's an interesting strategy which would tackle
the problem from a new angle and I would love to learn more about it. I just
believe that right now we should spend the limited resources we have on bridge
distribution and pluggable transports. It would surely be worth an experiment,
though!


Philipp

[0] https://metrics.torproject.org/network.html#bandwidth
[1] www.eecs.umich.edu/~zmao/Papers/china-censorship-pam11.pdf
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-15 Thread Philipp Winter
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:42:08PM +0800, Lorenz Kirchner wrote:
 Perhaps it's better to focus on improved bridge distribution strategies [0]
 and
 hard-to-block transport protocols [1]. Also, that would be a universal
 solution
 which would also help in other countries and not a specific - and probably
 hard
 to maintain - Chinese-only solution.

 But how would tor help people that do not have direct access to outside the
 gfw? actually many 'consumer' ISP in China now seem to have separate NATed
 networks that can't even connect to each other and they seem to route
 international requests if they allow them at all to special third-party
 providers who will handle the filtering (I guess)

 I still feel that a kind of 'peering relay' is needed for speed and to allow
 access for those users at all...

At the same time, these peering relays would become some sort of choke point.

After all, outside its jurisdiction, the censor (mostly) only has technical
control over the flow of information. Within its jurisdiction, however, we also
have to deal with social and legal control. And I'm afraid that this is harder
to defend against, than technical censorship.


Philipp
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-15 Thread Lorenz Kirchner
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Philipp Winter identity.funct...@gmail.com
 wrote:


 Yes, assuming the users would not give up out of frustration before :-) We
 can
 actually do the math: According to [0], at the moment the Tor network has
 an
 advertised bandwidth of 3000 MiB/s. Let's assume that all Chinese relays
 would
 account for 30 MiB/s. Even then, the probability of a Chinese relay being
 selected as first hop is only 30/3000 = 0.01 = 1%!


How long does it take to make 100 circuit attempts?


 However, there still remains a legal problem! You will have a hard time
 hiding
 the fact that you are operating a relay within China. And if this turns
 out to
 be a viable strategy, even more so. I suppose it wouldn't be too hard for
 the
 government to simply confiscate or shut down Chinese relays?


Yes, that is not impossible, but it depends how many relays there are and
how easy it is to set them up..
The legal thing is interesting as I have yet to see any rules or laws that
prohibit Chinese to circumvent censorship... afaik officially there is no
censorship in China so it is difficult to accuse someone of circumventing
it, however they most likely will find something else to accuse them of.

If there was a tor sub project producing say a widely available dd wrt
image that is ready to go, I bet there would be thousands of keen Chinese
getting their routers flashed just like many do it with their phones...
every market here has some people who will jailbreak this and that. It
seems to me that it would be a difficult task for the authorities to keep
confiscating...

In my opinion it is not far fetched to expect to eventually see several
tens of thousands of Chinese relays on VPN connections that could arguably
even be exit relays. Wouldn't that help the tor bandwidth cause overall?
Basically, ideally tor is providing the anonymity to safely share the
existing circumvention systems (VPN) across all the internal networks...
sort of thing




 [1] www.eecs.umich.edu/~zmao/Papers/china-censorship-pam11.pdf


interesting paper, thanks
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-14 Thread Roger Dingledine
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 08:25:40AM +0200, tor-admin wrote:
 ON Saturday, August 11. 2012, 18:25:03 Roger Dingledine wrote:
  The constraints are:
  * 100mbit+ connectivity, though in practice I expect they will spend
  most of their time doing far less than that.
  * No more than 2 bridges per /24. If you're running fast (100mbit+)
  exits (which is more important), exits on that /24 count toward this 2.
  * No more than 7 bridges total per data center.
  
  If you could set up 1 (or 2, or 20) and send me the address(es) privately,
  that would be grand.
 
 If I ask my ISP for additional IPs, how do I check these constraints, given 
 that I don't know other bridges/exits running at my ISP/DC.

Given that you're an early volunteer, I think you can approximate the
constraints as if you are the only person running exits / bridges on those
netblocks. That is, don't conflict with your own exits, and everything
should be fine.

In the future, I guess the better answer will be send me mail with
your planned netblocks, and I'll let you know if your plans are going
to produce any conflicts.

Thanks!
--Roger

___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-14 Thread tor-admin
On Monday, August 13. 2012, 00:55:45 Roger Dingledine wrote:
 This discussion really goes back to a simple question: is it better to
 use our funding for more design and development, or for strengthening
 the network? For exit relays, I think choosing strengthen the network
 is a great and worthwhile experiment. But for bridges, since the current
 Tor transport and current bridge distribution strategies are not great,
 I think it's better to use funding for better designs and better code.
 I should note that I actually encouraged VoA to want unpublished bridges:
 if we set up fast bridges and published them via bridges.torproject.org
 today, they'd get blocked quickly in China.
 
My understanding of bridge detection was, that Chinas GFW is able to detect 
the Tor SSL handshake and does active bridge probing after a successful 
connection to a (for the GFW) unknown bridge IP. So they should be able to 
block any bridge publish or unpublished very quickly, if someone from behind 
the GFW connects to a bridge. Am I missing something?

Regards,

torland

___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-13 Thread Andrew Beveridge
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 5:55 AM, Roger Dingledine a...@mit.edu wrote:

 I'm especially hoping to hear from volunteers for whom setting up a few
 extra bridges is basically free -- for example, those already running
 fast non-exit relays who have a few more IP addresses nearby. This is
 also a nice way for students at universities to get involved if they're
 not ready to run a fast public relay quite yet.

 --Roger

 ___
 tor-relays mailing list
 tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
 https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


I guess I fit into that category - the exit I run (mentioned previously in
the exit funding thread) is on a server which has about 3 free IP addresses
which I'm not using right now - I could easily use them as fast unpublished
bridges if somebody explained briefly how.

-- 
*
Andrew Beveridge,
**Tor lurker / sympathizer / advocate, exit node maintainer.*
Director / Computer Repair Technician @ TechFix LTD [
http://www.techfixuk.com]
Freelance Web Developer @ [http://www.andrewbeveridge.co.uk]
Tel/Fax: +44 (0) 1383269735 | *
Email: t...@techfixuk.com and...@techfixuk.com
*
*
5 Drum Road, Kelty, KY4 0DQ, Scotland
*
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-13 Thread grarpamp
 Sorry for exposing the internals of running
 a non-profit. But I think transparency is especially important here. :)

 I don't know why you feel sorry. Transparency is important for
 non-profit, at least for most I guess.

Non-profit is just a tax and legal designation. After any necessary
compliance with that, the degree of transparency, salaries paid,
competitiveness, degree of being closely held, and indeed all other
things... is completely variable.
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-12 Thread Sebastian G. bastik.tor
Roger Dingledine:
 Hi folks,
 
 In addition to the get many fast exit relays plan, that same funder
 (Voice of America) wants us to run a pile of fast stable unpublished
 bridges. We'll give the bridge addresses out manually to their target
 users over the coming months.
 (...) 

 We do have some funding for this, but I'm hoping that we can get enough
 volunteers so we can put the money toward more fast exits and better QA
 and build automation for the Tor bundles. So if you have good connectivity
 but can't run an exit, this is a great way to contribute.
 (...)

I might be overreacting (especially since nobody else replies), but
doesn't that split up Tor users in (two) groups?

Instead of having a larger pool (of bridges) for anyone you ask for
unpublished bridges which will be handed to privileged people.

Volunteers running unpublished bridges and giving them to friends in
$restrictive_country is one thing and their private choice. The same is
valid for a funder that pays for unpublished bridges. It appears fine to
me that a funder can make such choices.

You ask volunteers to achieve a funders goal. Those might run a bridge
already, but un-publish it. Less bridges for the rest. They could run
relays and turn them into unpublished bridges. Less relays for anyone.

Running a relay or bridge (published) would be a better contribution IMO.

Some were upset about funding for exits, because the Tor Project could
become dependent to the funding. 125+ exits is a huge number, but I
didn't distrust your judgment. However now I'm upset that the
unpublished bridges hurt the network. It's hurting the network to
achieve a funders goal. To me that's the wrong way.

Please read you as the Tor Project and your as the Tor
Projects', because I did not intend to address this to you, as Roger.

Regards,
Sebastian
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


Re: [tor-relays] Help the Tor Project by running a fast unpublished bridge

2012-08-12 Thread Roger Dingledine
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 09:58:54AM +0200, Sebastian G. bastik.tor wrote:
 You ask volunteers to achieve a funders goal. Those might run a bridge
 already, but un-publish it. Less bridges for the rest. They could run
 relays and turn them into unpublished bridges. Less relays for anyone.
 
 Running a relay or bridge (published) would be a better contribution IMO.

Hi Sebastian,

Thanks for starting the discussion.

I totally agree that running a big relay (exit or non-exit) is more
directly useful to the Tor network than running one of these unpublished
bridges.

We're in an interesting situation here, where we can use their bridge
funding for other more important things if we don't spent it all on
bridges. So maybe the subject should have been the more counterintuitive
Help fund Tor bundle usability by running a fast unpublished bridge.

Another option would be to give it to Moritz et al at torservers.net
so they can run more fast exits -- at which point Moritz might end up
sending a similar mail saying Help us run more exit relays by running
a fast unpublished bridge.

Now that I think about it, maybe the best way to phrase it would be as
a matching donation: Run a fast unpublished bridge with 2 IP addresses,
and we have a funder who will match your donation by giving $200-300/mo
to Tor. That's the reasoning that led me to say it's a great way to
contribute to Tor if you can't run a fast relay yourself.

Another model I've been pondering is to offer people some funding to
run a fast *non*-exit relay along with a pair of extra IP addresses for
these unpublished bridges. But on the theory that exits are more scarce
than non-exits (and I don't want to muddy the current exit experiment
with even more money), I figured it would be better to separate the roles.

This discussion really goes back to a simple question: is it better to
use our funding for more design and development, or for strengthening
the network? For exit relays, I think choosing strengthen the network
is a great and worthwhile experiment. But for bridges, since the current
Tor transport and current bridge distribution strategies are not great,
I think it's better to use funding for better designs and better code.
I should note that I actually encouraged VoA to want unpublished bridges:
if we set up fast bridges and published them via bridges.torproject.org
today, they'd get blocked quickly in China.

I'm especially hoping to hear from volunteers for whom setting up a few
extra bridges is basically free -- for example, those already running
fast non-exit relays who have a few more IP addresses nearby. This is
also a nice way for students at universities to get involved if they're
not ready to run a fast public relay quite yet.

I hope that helps to explain. Sorry for exposing the internals of running
a non-profit. But I think transparency is especially important here. :)

--Roger

___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays