On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 11:01:23PM -0400, grarpamp wrote: > On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 7:23 PM, Ian Goldberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 07:20:29PM -0400, grarpamp wrote: > >> > /* Don't actually allow compression; it uses ram and time, but the > >> > data > >> > * we transmit is all encrypted anyway. */ > >> > result->ctx->comp_methods = NULL; > >> > >> This comment is confusing. Why are you asserting/mixing the two with > >> the ', but' that 'encryption anyway' is excuse to not compress due to > >> 'ram/time'? They are two separate things. Either you are encrypting > >> compressed data, or encrypting uncompressed data. > > > > It seems to me the intent of the comment is that the *plaintext* data > > being transmitted is already encrypted (at another layer), and so is not > > going to be compressible, so don't waste ram/time trying to do so. > > I though this portion referred to compress then encrypt, not > encrypt then compress (which would of course be pointless). > ie: I thought the openssl zlib routines were to compressed then > encrypted.
Yes, that's right. But the data to be (optionally compressed then) encrypted is, in Tor, typically *already* encrypted by the application layer, so compressing then encrypting that is not better than just re-encrypting it. - Ian _______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
