On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:32:20AM -0400, Jon Smithe wrote:
Hi,
As for the deanonymization attack, I think it is pretty novel in that it uses a custom traffic signature to make the attack from http://freehaven.net/anonbib/cache/hs-attack06.pdf more reliable, but otherwise that is why we introduced guard nodes.
The math behind this concept is not overly compelling or I'm just dumb, both are probable and neither are mutually exclusive, but if I were looking for a state-based backdoor, I'd imagine it to look a bit like this (which is not to imply that is the case here by any means).
Jon
Hi Jon!
You make some interesting and valid points, however this is the type of statement that spreads fud and it doesn't help anyone. Please see bug #8240 [0] which contains a detailed discussion of this topic.
tl;dr This is being worked on, 0.2.4 addresses many of these problems and 0.2.5 will continue to make improvments.
Whether or not you were implying this situation was a calculated decision that resulted in a "state-based backdoor", it is the insinuation of such a thing that can hurt Tor's reputation.
- Matt