Slashdot Mirror


Tor Eyes Crowdfunding Campaign To Upgrade Its Hidden Services

apexcp writes The web's biggest anonymity network is considering a crowdfunding campaign to overhaul its hidden services. From the article: "In the last 15 months, several of the biggest anonymous websites on the Tor network have been identified and seized by police. In most cases, no one is quite sure how it happened. The details of such a campaign have yet to be revealed. With enough funding, Tor could have developers focusing their work entirely on hidden services, a change in developer priorities that many Tor users have been hoping for in recent years."

48 of 106 comments (clear)

  1. Special Thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    To our contributors, even though we don't know who you are *wink wink*

  2. Nothing I'd like better... by DumbSwede · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ..than to have the FBI wondering why I'm contributing money to this cause. I applaud the goal, but I'll let someone more altruistic than me step up to bat.

    Save me the "When Good Men Do Nothing," I have family and other considerations outside Slashdot idealism.

    1. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As a Swede, presumably living in Sweden, why would you be afraid of the FBI? Is the FBI something people should be afraid of? And, is anonymity a crime all of a sudden?

    2. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Is the FBI something people should be afraid of?"

      Yes.

      "And, is anonymity a crime all of a sudden?"

      Not all of a sudden.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog#Cultural_usage

    3. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by Nutria · · Score: 1

      As a Swede, presumably living in Sweden

      There are 8 metric ass-loads of people of Swedish descent living is the US.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    4. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ..than to have the FBI wondering why I'm contributing money to this cause.

      Does it even matter anymore? They've already declared you to be an enemy and a terrorist in their eyes. Why else would they see you as guilty until proven innocent?

      Make no mistake, the police state is here. Sitting idly by and thinking it would blow over didn't work for the Germans, and it won't work here.

    5. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by visionsofmcskill · · Score: 1

      Im no braver than you, and will not get anywhere near this for the same reasons.

      But that is the actual point of "when good men do nothing"... its when people WITH families and other considerations (something to lose) are NOT brave enough to act on what may very well be dangerous, its when they dont act evil is allowed to thrive.

      What rational white person from the 50's in the dixey south with a family and kids, a small business and the protection of the community would brave the wrath of their neighbors and the KKK to protect some relatively unknown (to them) and anonymous black people?

      As i said before, im no braver - and the point of that statement was to ellucidate that sometimes horrible things thrive because "good men" like you and i have good reasons not to shed our cowardice.

      --
      --Idiots, Every single one of YOU, A flaming mass of conglomerated morons, hey wait a second, isnt that how RAID works?
    6. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by burni2 · · Score: 1

      I think you are on the best way to find out about the meaning of "freedom of choice" you exercised your right to "freedom of speech" because good men did many things.

      But the best solution if you have nothing to say.

      Just shut up and ignore it.

      But you would make the headlines:

      "Father of two daughters indicted for giving funding to U.S. government backed anti censor operation. - President Obama faces impeachment over funding of pro american value anti censor ship program."

      He was soo pro american and all over the bill of rights .. that he overlooked the 10th amendment .. "If you ever take these words serious you are a fool."

    7. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by N1AK · · Score: 1

      Save me the "When Good Men Do Nothing," I have family and other considerations outside Slashdot idealism.

      It's a shame you don't see the irony in that statement. If anyone can afford to throw some money at Tor it is the people who don't do anything overly contentious, it's a shame that your cowardice is stopping you from doing relatively safe things now that could protect your freedoms later, at which point doing something about it would be far more dangerous.

    8. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Save me the "When Good Men Do Nothing," I have family and other considerations outside Slashdot idealism.

      The problem isn't "When good men do nothing". It's your tinfoil chapeau and paranoia. If you seriously care about your family, seek professional help as soon as possible.

    9. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by hodet · · Score: 1

      4.6 fucktonnes

    10. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Being of Swedish descent doesn't automatically make you a Swede.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    11. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Re "So stop being paranoid. The FBI isn't going to after every donor to a project like this."
      Recall "The NSA Is Targeting Users of Privacy Services, Leaked Code Shows" (07.03.14)
      http://www.wired.com/2014/07/n...
      "The rules indicate that the NSA tracks any IP address that connects to the Tor web site or any IP address that contacts a server that is used for an anonymous email service..."
      "The NSA is also tracking anyone who visits the popular online Linux publication, ....., which the NSA refers to as an “extremist forum” in the source code."

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    12. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      You should stand up to your oppressors and not let chilling effects stop you promoting and protecting freedom. If people give up due to chilling effects, let alone specific threats, we lose.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    13. Re:Nothing I'd like better... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      Its easy to forget, especially when many of us talk so much about large policy issues, that the US government is NOT a single org but a very large umbrella collection of many interdependent orgs, each with their own agenda.

      Sometimes these agendas align, sometimes, they diverge and work at cross purposes.

      The NSA has no operational need for tor, they are likely 100% focused on breaking it. Likewise the DEA, and FBI similarly. However, you start getting to DARPA, and parts of the State Department, and a strong tor is actually an asset for some of them or the people they support.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  3. 3 hops? by mrspoonsi · · Score: 1

    If tor has 3 hops from source to hidden service, and perhaps there are 10,000 nodes, how hard is it for a government to have 25% of those nodes under its control? and if you own all the hops, you know where the hidden server is.

    1. Re:3 hops? by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      DoS the hidden site, see where the traffic ends up. Rinse, repeat.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    2. Re:3 hops? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      If you use TOR or Freenet and have a family or are not a millionaire who can afford to throw away hundreds of thousands on lawyers you are a fool, simple as that. As my friend in the state crime lab pointed out the ways the laws are written when it comes to distribution and facilitation mean that anybody that runs an exit node or has a Freenet cache can be busted as a child pornographer and what do ya know, some countries are already doing just that.

      Thanks to the vague as fuck ways these laws are written it DOES NOT MATTER that you can't see the files you cache on Freenet, that you aren't scanning the TOR traffic coming through your exit node or that you don't even see so much as a single jpg, it doesn't even matter if your PC is obviously hijacked by somebody else because at the end of the day ALL that matters is that CP passed through your router. That is all the court cares about, the cops who get increased federal funding for more CP busts sure has no fucks to give and the prosecutor? look at the virus link, even when shown proof that when the unit is connected to the net it is instantly controlled by another party he comes up with a "I bet he did that on purpose to cover up his crimes!" BS excuse. Why? Because I have no doubt he'll be running for public office and CP busts sell to the soccer mom set.

      So you can believe its a honeypot (which is what I believe, too many "advocates" banging the "TOR is for freedom and privacy!" drum are getting their checks from the likes of Radio Free Asia and other CIA fronts. I seriously doubt any less than 90% of the money going into TOR isn't coming from 3 letter agencies and fronts for the same like RFA) or a bastion of freedom, doesn't matter, all that matters is the current laws as written mean you can spend the rest of your life behind bars for using it. I don't know about anybody else but I have no desire to spend the rest of my life rotting in a cell, especially if it turns out to be a giant honeypot for alphabet agencies to run spook shit overseas while giving them plenty of targets to bust.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    3. Re:3 hops? by Ingenium13 · · Score: 1

      Hidden services actually use 7 hops. The hidden service picks several relays at random and makes them the "introduction points" and pushes this along with the hidden service descriptor. These introduction points are at the end of a normal Tor circuit (ie 3 hops). When a client wants to access the site, it connects to the introduction point also over a Tor circuit. The client and hidden service then randomly pick a relay as a rendezvous point, because you don't want the introduction points overloaded.

      At that point, both client and server connect to the rendezvous point over regular Tor circuits, for 7 total hops. All further communication is done over this 7 hop circuit.

  4. It's not a secret by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The government connects to the kiddy porn site and downloads a 500mb video, they have PRISM tell them the computer that transferred 500mb of data to their computer, the computer that transferred 500mb of data to that computer, and so on. It's metadata all the way back to the actual hidden service where the 500mb file came from. As a bonus, they can have PRISM tell them everyone else that connected to a computer that connected to a computer that connected to a computer that connected to the kiddy porn site, too. Works for data of any size and type, not just kiddy porn, as long as the filesize is unique enough or you don't give a shit about false positives or perjury.

    Tor has to do something about the timing and metadata attacks if it is to remain relevant. The only issue is whether they can do something about it without making it even slower than it already is.

  5. A good idea by Kevin+Fishburne · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Finally the world has a way to give their respective government a mighty middle finger after all the bullshit that's been going on lately. I hope they get millions from every corner of Earth.

    --
    Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
    1. Re:A good idea by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

      The FBI, GCHQ, BND, etc are going to tear apart the finances of every person that donates to this project.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    2. Re:A good idea by Kevin+Fishburne · · Score: 1

      The FBI, GCHQ, BND, etc are going to tear apart the finances of every person that donates to this project.

      Under what pretense? Funding terrorism? Tor, Ter, not too much a stretch I guess. Seriously, they can't do a thing to stop Tor funding without resorting to breaking or seriously misapplying their own laws. I don't think they'll go that far.

      --
      Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
    3. Re:A good idea by mars-nl · · Score: 1

      Not very long ago a website called Wikileaks had quite some trouble receiving funds because Paypal, Visa and Mastercard refused to cooperate.

    4. Re:A good idea by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Under what pretense?

      A high-enough percentage of Tor users are there for drugs and child porn that a clever FBI attorney could convince a friendly judge that donating to Tor is Probable Cause. GCHQ probably doesn't even clever word smithing to investigate them.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  6. confusion about what TOR is for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Traffic analysis and other techniques make you trivially de-anonymized by the NSA.

    TOR is NOT anonymous, and anyone who thinks it is deserves what they get. But what it IS good for is hiding from non-5-eyes countries. Say you are in the middle east and your third world government doesn't like you reading pr0n. No problem, the NSA isn't gonna hang your ass out to dry for that, and they certainly wont compromise their capabilities for stupid political shit. So TOR away all you want, to keep yourself safe from your local tinpot dictator.

    That's what TOR is for. It's NOT for somehow magically keeping your identity secret from the people who invented it and own much of the network.

  7. Its a good thing they are lawyers by Bob_Who · · Score: 1

    ...Because now they'll need a few good tax attorneys.

  8. One has to wonder by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    The feds had no problem ferreting out the Silk Road operators, but it seems they're completely unable to do anything against the cryptolocker extortionists. Despite the damage being by some margin bigger.

    One really has to wonder where the priorities are...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:One has to wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Feds protect the NY criminals. The cryptolocker guys know which kind of thing goes unpunished, very much like the NY banksters know. You can massively mess with people's lifes by means of finance fraud, put PLEASE dont use drugs for that end.

      We know that drugs do nasty things while the NY banksters only made folks like Hitler and Mussolini happen. See the rationality ?

    2. Re:One has to wonder by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      The Cryptlocker guys, unfortunately, did a near perfect job implementing their ransom-ware and command/control net. Both the US Justice Dept and Interpol did go after them, and ultimately took down the Zeus botnet controlling the malware, even getting back all the keys for the encrypted files. Don't think for a second that the Justice Dept wouldn't have loved to catch those guys and splash it all over the front page if they could have, though.

      I don't buy the conspiracy theories. You can bet the feds are still trying to track Cryptolocker guys with considerable zeal, given how much damage that software caused. I think they just hid their tracks better than the Silk Road operators.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  9. People have short memory by Trachman · · Score: 1

    These were US agencies that have funded creation of TOR; CIA and NSA, you name it.

    Obviously, the decision has been made that if encryption and anonymity cannot be controlled, then it needs to be led, and there are many ways to stay on top:
    a) controlled nodes b) code flaws

    1. Re:People have short memory by AHuxley · · Score: 1
      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  10. Separate the hidden service from the tor daemon by KiloByte · · Score: 1

    Rule #1 that should be enforced: contrary to all popular docs, the hidden service should never, ever, be on the same logical machine as the tor daemon. The latter needs connectivity to arbitrary IPs, which means as soon as any part of the service is pwned -- or just sports a data leak -- the bad guys can learn who you are. If the hidden service machine doesn't know its IP nor other kinds of data that can be used to identify it, it can't leak that.

    This won't avoid traffic analysis, but (most likely) the majority of hidden service breaches so far has been done by exploiting some bug in a http daemon and making it query http://home.spooks.gov/ outside tor.

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    1. Re:Separate the hidden service from the tor daemon by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      agree with that.

      hidden service operators should be running a separate "last mile" service.

      Something like sticking it on a I2P network with no internet access and routing out through tor on another section of the network.

  11. To be revealed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    In most cases, no one is quite sure how it happened. The details of such a campaign have yet to be revealed.

    Could it have been the Fed's control of the whole network? Or perhaps it was an analysis of router traffic flow records, which supposedly reveals 81% of tor users, according to researchers...

    1. Re:To be revealed... by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      More likely they were all running on webservers with standard internet access.

      Pretty straight forward to get a webserver or other service to identify itself if the machine it is on can resolve a standard url.

      plain jane simple post shellshock bug.

  12. Secure by darkain · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No matter how much effort goes into securing the transport layer, it means absolutely nothing if the end nodes themselves are insecure. Something as simple as a SQL injection or remote code execution could easily deanonymize an end node. With how quickly many of those sites sprung up, one of the current theories is lack of security on the end-points themselves is what was attacked, not the Tor network itself.

    1. Re:Secure by slashmydots · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the same thing but in addition, how are you supposed to give money to common hidden services? They're hidden. What are they going to do, ask nicely for them to give a paypal e-mail address? I don't think so. They could go the bitcoin route but seriously, throwing money at better servers doesn't mean there's a smarter person running it. You "zoom out" to just reserach and development on better Tor protocols and it still leaves it wide open to stupid people. You can't just throw money at stupid people running hidden services so oh well.

      There are three options. First, run a hand-written HTML non-interactive page. Nobody is likely to hack that.

      Two, run a canned PHP solution like phpBB and get hacked.

      Three, write a flawless interactive, database-driven site all yourself from scratch and then never use that code at any job or on any resume or any semblance of the same thing on the open web which is a giant waste.

    2. Re:Secure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can almost guarantee the safety of your protocol, but you'll never guarantee the safety of someone's personal PC. Almost all attacks on Tor users that we know about have been through shit like malware and 'unsecure' things being on Tor that are easy to track.

      You can make a car that's immune to mechanical failure, but you'll never be able to guarantee the driver isn't dumb and that other people aren't looking to run into them for insurance scams or that other people's cars won't have mechanical failures.

    3. Re:Secure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yet nobody seems to be considering the possibility that TOR simply isn't providing the anonymity that it claims, or that, being a US-government funded project, it isn't just a means of tempting people into using it for their "secure" *nudge nudge wink wink* communications. There was an article on Slashdot or Arstechnica, I'm almost positive, where some researchers demonstrated that by using Cisco's "Netflow" package they were able to successfully identify about 81% of the TOR users at the other end...100% in a closed, "laboratory" setting.

      Oh, I'm sure that a number of them really did get caught by having bad site security, that's practically a given. Most people who truly want to remain anonymous aren't using TOR any longer though, they're using Freenet, I2P, disparate other packages... In the meantime all sorts of TOR hidden services are disappearing, not just the nasty ones, because 1) better safe than sorry and 2), there's been so many recent stories about TOR hidden services being busted that anyone who wants to truly remain anonymous on the Internet no longer takes the TOR project seriously.

    4. Re:Secure by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      Yet nobody seems to be considering the possibility that TOR simply isn't providing the anonymity that it claims

      Well, yeah, because:
      http://www.dailydot.com/politi...

      However, upon further examination, no one could quite figure out where all supposedly seized hidden services were. After all, the biggest Dark Net markets are still in operation. The biggest child pornography sites are still running. In fact, the seized websites represent less than a third of Dark Net commerce.

      Update Nov. 8, 8:31am: Far from the original number of 414 seized hidden services and lower even than the number 50 provided to the New York Times, the FBI told Forbes that it had seized 27 actual sites but 414 .onion addresses that all go to the same sites.

      ___
      Seems pretty obvious that it was 27 websites all hit by the shellshock bug to give up their real IP.

    5. Re:Secure by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      If it has access to the wider internet other than through tor, the IP address of the host network.

      A lot of those taken down seem to be on VPS hosts, which provide virtually zero opsec for the actual server being identified. Since you don't need to get the IP address of the server, just the name of the VPS service provider (e.g. from a 404 page)

  13. Re: I need Bennet Haselton to analyze this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Bennett Hasselton was once bitten by a snake. After 3 hours of excruciating pain, the snake died.

  14. Re:Who is actually behind "TOR" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Tor is centered on one single tech: onion routing.
    They seem to refuse to consider adding or adopting other techs, like using chaff in the network and trivial delay/random queues to at least defeat some timing and observation attacks.
    It's like they're hooked and stuck on their unilateral approach.
    And when people bring up alternatives they point to anonbib and disclaim them.
    Well yeah, nothing's a total solution, but what some people voice is helpful.
    They're also way too quiet about their position whether personal or corporate or project about being for or against govt surveillance, the fact of where they get their funds, all these quiet LEA liasons they must be interacting with.
    Come on guys, everyone has opinions, show some balls, vent a little.
    Anymore I'd bet I2P and some other networks are in a better position anonymous-service wise.

  15. Re:Who is actually behind "TOR" ? by mars-nl · · Score: 1

    As I understand it Tor is between you and some other place on the public internet. I2P is not made to go out to the internet. It's more like Tor without exit and only hidden sites, like a secret internet on top of the public internet.

  16. Payment Options by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Will they accept Flooz?

  17. Re: I need Bennet Haselton to analyze this by KJSwartz · · Score: 1

    I'm sure we all are thinking the exact same thing at this moment.

    Spare a second and join us.

  18. Re:Who is actually behind "TOR" ? by JakeBurn · · Score: 1

    Why are people over looking the money?I thought silk road went down because Roberts wasn't careful where his money went.