Tor Open To Attack
An anonymous reader writes "A group of researchers have written a paper that lays out an attack against Tor (PDF) in enough detail to cause Roger Dingledine a fair amount of heartburn. The essential avenue of attack is that Tor doesn't verify claims of uptime or bandwidth, allowing an attacker to advertise more than it need deliver, and thus draw traffic. If the attacker controls the entry and exit node and has decent clocks, then the attacker can link these together and trace someone through the network."
If the attacker advertises absolutely massive values (and hey, it's only a string) they can time out all of the packets and DoS the network too.
This actually makes me wonder if there is a military/intel datacentre that does this already.
"To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
...is really what the article is about. Granted, I only read the abstract, but someone here at /. seems too intent on making a dramatic headline out of this.
It has been known for some time that anyone with the resources to do so could launch an end-to-end attack on Tor. That someone with relatively few resources could launch the same attack is newsworthy, perhaps, but far more interesting is the observation that optimizing network traffic flow in order to improve performance is the direct cause of this weakness.
It doesn't tell you anything meaningful unless it tells you what the requirements on the distribution of the nodes is. You could, hypothetically, run a few thousand tor nodes on a single machine. Would this allow you to compromise a network of a few tens of thousands of nodes?
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Well, if they knew the access point you were using (based on the IP address, which they'd then take to the ISP and demand to know the customer address), they'd just go down there and sniff packets for your MAC address. It's fairly trivial at that point to determine the direction that the radio signals are coming from. (There are guys that do it as a hobby.)
Probably your best bet would be to use a spoofed MAC address, and change both the AP you connect to, the MAC address you report, and the PC's physical location, on a regular and frequent basis. That would make it difficult to determine whether you were a single location that's moving a lot and using different MAC addresses, or were multiple computers each just using the AP periodically.
Still, there's no foolproof way to avoid discovery against an omnipotent adversary.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
This actually makes me wonder if there is a military/intel datacentre that does this already.
Probably, but not for the reasons you think. Tor is known to be used by the military (how much is anybody's guess) for the same reasons anybody else would use it.
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
Some military broadband links send a constant stream of encrypted data, whether real data or filler. This "hiding in plain sight" reduces the ability of someone to perform traffic analysis on the network in precisely such a manner. This would be awful on the Net, of course, if everyone did it. But people should be aware that encryption is not the only facet of communications security that they need to worry about.
Even if you aren't able to become both the entry and exit mode, using the technique of faking your bandwidth/uptime can lead to more traffic for your exit node, which means more passwords to sniff. Not everyone seems to realize that just because the Tor protocol is encrypted doesn't mean the exit node can't sniff unencrypted traffic. Granted, the exit node has no idea where the traffic came from, but often information such as login information for a personal account can give that away. That's even better than having just an IP. All it takes is to set yourself up as a Tor node (the uptime/bandwidth faking helps) and run a tool like Cain or dsniff.
The first 6 digits are the manufacturer. (minus a bit or two) Your NIC was made by MSI.
Herbivore isn't vulnerable to traffic analysis but it's vulnerable to DoS: the attacker's nodes follow the secure entry protocol and get assigned to random cliques. Then they transmit in every round, jamming communication within their cliques. Jamming doesn't require any more bandwidth than normal participation in the protocol, and the source of the jamming can't be detected because communication within a clique is completely anonymous. With cliques of 128 nodes, an attacker who controls 1% of the nodes can jam 72% of the cliques at any given time. If the innocent nodes move to different cliques to escape the jamming, the attackers can move too.