On 7 feb 2012, at 22:08, Ondrej Mikle wrote: > 1. full packet might leak identifying information about OS or resolver used, > quoting Nick: >> There are parts of a DNS packet that we wouldn't want >> to have the Tor client make up. For example, DNS transaction IDs >> would need to avoid collisions. Similarly, I don't see why the client >> should be setting most of the possible flags. > > The query will work as if following was set: flags 0x110 (recursive, > non-authenticated data ok), DO bit set. Is there any reason for setting some > flags otherwise or make some optional?
If you bundle a full resolver (e.g. libunbound) with the TOR client, you will be much better off doing full DNS packet transport, or you have to rewrite the upstream forwarding code. I do about the potential fingerprinting issues (I'm one of the people behind Net::DNS::Fingerprint), but in this case I believe we can mitigate these issues (if considered important) by masking/rewriting some DNS request fields within the TOR client and/or exit node. jakob _______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev