123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331 |
- Filename: xxx-bridges.txt
- Title: Behavior for bridge users, bridge relays, and bridge authorities
- Version: $Revision: 12051 $
- Last-Modified: $Date: 2007-10-19 14:56:24 -0400 (Fri, 19 Oct 2007) $
- Author: Roger Dingledine
- Created: 11-Nov-2007
- Status: Open
- 0. Preface
- This document describes the design decisions around support for bridge
- users, bridge relays, and bridge authorities. It acts as an overview
- of the bridge design and deployment for developers, and it also tries
- to point out limitations in the current design and implementation.
- For more details on what all of these mean, look at blocking.tex in
- /doc/design-paper/
- 1. Bridge relays
- Bridge relays are just like normal Tor relays except they don't publish
- their server descriptors to the main directory authorities.
- 1.1. PublishServerDescriptor
- To configure your relay to be a bridge relay, just add
- PublishServerDescriptor bridge
- to your torrc. This will cause your relay to publish its descriptor
- to the bridge authorities rather than to the default authorities.
- Alternatively, you can say
- PublishServerDescriptor 0
- which will cause your relay to not publish anywhere. This could be
- useful for private bridges.
- 1.2. Defining DirPort
- Bridges need to answer BEGIN_DIR requests, both so they can answer
- "/server/authority" questions ("what's your descriptor?") and so they
- can supply their bridge users with cached copies of all the various
- Tor network information.
- Right now (0.2.0.11-alpha) we require that bridges turn their DirPort on
- -- which means both that we answer BEGIN_DIR requests and that we fetch
- and cache directory information in an aggressive way like other servers.
- But:
- a) we don't enforce that DirPort is on, since it's not clear how to
- detect if the user meant to be a bridge. So it's easy to set up a bridge
- relay that silently refuses BEGIN_DIR requests and is thus useless.
- b) We don't actually care if they have an open or reachable DirPort. So
- at some point we should separate having an open DirPort from answering
- directory questions. Which leads to:
- c) We need to investigate if there are any anonymity worries with
- answering BEGIN_DIR requests when our DirPort is off. If there aren't,
- we should drop the DirPort requirement.
- I claim that we don't open any new attacks by answering BEGIN_DIR
- questions when DirPort is off: it's still a fine question to ask what
- partitioning attacks there are when you can query a Tor client about
- its current directory opinions, but these attacks already exist when
- DirPort is on.
- We need to answer this issue in 0.2.0.x.
- 1.3. Exit policy
- Bridge relays should use an exit policy of "reject *:*". This is
- because they only need to relay traffic between the bridge users
- and the rest of the Tor network, so there's no need to let people
- exit directly from them.
- 1.4. RelayBandwidthRate / RelayBandwidthBurst
- We invented the RelayBandwidth* options for this situation: Tor clients
- who want to allow relaying too. See proposal 111 for details. Relay
- operators should feel free to rate-limit their relayed traffic.
- 1.5. Helping the user with port forwarding, NAT, etc.
- Just as for operating normal relays, our documentation and hints for
- how to make your ORPort reachable are inadequate for normal users.
- We need to work harder on this step, perhaps in 0.2.1.x.
- 1.6. Vidalia integration
- Vidalia 0.0.15 has turned its "Relay" settings page into a tri-state
- "Don't relay" / "Relay for the Tor network" / "Help censored users".
- If you click the third choice, it forces your exit policy to reject *:*,
- and it forces your DirPort to 9030 (but see Sec 1.2 above about DirPort).
- If all the bridges end up on port 9001, that's not so good. On the
- other hand, putting the bridges on a low-numbered port in the Unix
- world requires jumping through extra hoops. The current compromise is
- that Vidalia makes the ORPort default to 443 on Windows, and 9001 on
- other platforms.
- At the bottom of the relay config settings window, Vidalia displays
- the bridge identifier to the operator (see Section 3.1) so he can pass
- it on to bridge users.
- 1.7. What if the default ORPort is already used?
- If the user already has a webserver or some other application
- bound to port 443, then Tor will fail to bind it and complain to the
- user, probably in a cryptic way. Rather than just working on a better
- error message (though we should do this), we should consider an
- "ORPort auto" option that tells Tor to try to find something that's
- bindable and reachable. This would also help us tolerate ISPs that
- filter incoming connections on port 80 and port 443. But this should
- be a different proposal, and can wait until 0.2.1.x.
- 2. Bridge authorities.
- Bridge authorities are like normal directory authorities, except they
- don't create their own network-status documents or votes. So if you
- ask an authority for a network-status document or consensus, they
- behave like a directory mirror: they give you one from one of the main
- authorities. But if you ask the bridge authority for the descriptor
- corresponding to a particular identity fingerprint, it will happily
- give you the latest descriptor for that fingerprint.
- To become a bridge authority, add these lines to your torrc:
- AuthoritativeDirectory 1
- BridgeAuthoritativeDir 1
- Right now there's one bridge authority, running on the Tonga relay.
- 2.1. Exporting bridge-purpose descriptors
- We've added a new purpose for server descriptors: the "bridge"
- purpose. With the new router-descriptors file format that includes
- annotations, it's easy to look through it and find the bridge-purpose
- descriptors.
- We should work with Tonga to export its router-descriptors file to
- some place where we can distribute the bridge addresses according to
- the policies in blocking.pdf. It might even be easier to have it write
- out a separate file, just for export, that includes only the bridge
- descriptors; or maybe a six-liner perl postprocessing script is the
- better plan there to create a file for export.
- 2.2. Reachability/uptime testing
- Right now the bridge authorities just passively collect bridge
- descriptors, and give them out on request. At some point we are going
- to want to recommend new bridges to users, and we'll want to have
- some way of deciding which ones are up right now, which ones have
- been around for a while, etc. We should have the bridge authorities
- do active measurements of bridges just as the normal authorities do
- active measurements of normal relays. Then we can export the results
- just like in Section 2.1. above.
- In the design document, we suggested that bridges should publish
- anonymously (i.e. via Tor) to the bridge authority, so somebody watching
- the bridge authority can't just enumerate all the bridges. But if we're
- doing active measurement, the game is up. Perhaps we should back off on
- this goal, or perhaps we should do our active measurement anonymously?
- Answering this issue is scheduled for 0.2.1.x.
- 2.3. Migrating to multiple bridge authorities
- Having only one bridge authority is both a trust bottleneck (if you
- break into one place you learn about every single bridge we've got)
- and a robustness bottleneck (when it's down, bridge users become sad).
- Right now if we put up a second bridge authority, all the bridges would
- publish to it, and (assuming the code works) bridge users would query
- a random bridge authority. This resolves the robustness bottleneck,
- but makes the trust bottleneck even worse.
- In 0.2.1.x and later we should think about better ways to have multiple
- bridge authorities.
- 3. Bridge users.
- Bridge users are like ordinary Tor users except they use encrypted
- directory connections by default, and they use bridge relays as both
- entry guards (their first hop) and directory guards (the source of
- all their directory information).
- To become a bridge user, add the following two lines to your torrc:
- UseBridges 1
- TunnelDirConns 1
- and then add at least one "Bridge" line to your torrc based on the
- format below.
- 3.1. Format of the bridge identifier.
- The canonical format for a bridge identifier contains an IP address,
- an ORPort, and an identity fingerprint:
- bridge 128.31.0.34:9009 4C17 FB53 2E20 B2A8 AC19 9441 ECD2 B017 7B39 E4B1
- However, the identity fingerprint can be left out, in which case the
- bridge user will connect to that relay and use it as a bridge regardless
- of what identity key it presents:
- bridge 128.31.0.34:9009
- This might be useful for cases where only short bridge identifiers
- can be communicated to bridge users.
- In a future version we may also support bridge identifiers that are
- only a key fingerprint:
- bridge 4C17 FB53 2E20 B2A8 AC19 9441 ECD2 B017 7B39 E4B1
- and the bridge user can fetch the latest descriptor from the bridge
- authority (see Section 3.4).
- 3.2. Bridges as entry guards
- For now, bridge users add their bridge relays to their list of "entry
- guards" (see path-spec.txt for background on entry guards). They are
- managed by the entry guard algorithms exactly as if they were a normal
- entry guard -- their keys and timing get cached in the "state" file,
- etc. This means that when the Tor user starts up with "UseBridges"
- disabled, he will skip past the bridge entries since they won't be
- listed as up and usable in his networkstatus consensus. But to be clear,
- the "entry_guards" list doesn't currently distinguish guards by purpose.
- Internally, each bridge user keeps a smartlist of "bridge_info_t"
- that reflects the "bridge" lines from his torrc along with a download
- schedule (see Section 3.5 below). When he starts Tor, he attempts
- to fetch a descriptor for each configured bridge (see Section 3.4
- below). When he succeeds at getting a descriptor for one of the bridges
- in his list, he adds it directly to the entry guard list using the
- normal add_an_entry_guard() interface. Once a bridge descriptor has
- been added, should_delay_dir_fetches() will stop delaying further
- directory fetches, and the user begins to bootstrap his directory
- information from that bridge (see Section 3.3).
- Currently bridge users cache their bridge descriptors to the
- "cached-descriptors" file (annotated with purpose "bridge"), but
- they don't make any attempt to reuse descriptors they find in this
- file. The theory is that either the bridge is available now, in which
- case you can get a fresh descriptor, or it's not, in which case an
- old descriptor won't do you much good.
- We could disable writing out the bridge lines to the state file, if
- we think this is a problem.
- As an exception, if we get an application request when we have one
- or more bridge descriptors but we believe none of them are running,
- we mark them all as running again. This is similar to the exception
- already in place to help long-idle Tor clients realize they should
- fetch fresh directory information rather than just refuse requests.
- 3.3. Bridges as directory guards
- In addition to using bridges as the first hop in their circuits, bridge
- users also use them to fetch directory updates. Other than initial
- bootstrapping to find a working bridge descriptor (see Section 3.4
- below), all further non-anonymized directory fetches will be redirected
- to the bridge.
- This means that bridge relays need to have cached answers for all
- questions the bridge user might ask. This makes the upgrade path
- tricky --- for example, if we migrate to a v4 directory design, the
- bridge user would need to keep using v3 so long as his bridge relays
- only knew how to answer v3 queries.
- In a future design, for cases where the user has enough information
- to build circuits yet the chosen bridge doesn't know how to answer a
- given query, we might teach bridge users to make an anonymized request
- to a more suitable directory server.
- 3.4. How bridge users get their bridge descriptor
- Bridge users can fetch bridge descriptors in two ways: by going directly
- to the bridge and asking for "/tor/server/authority", or by going to
- the bridge authority and asking for "/tor/server/fp/ID". By default,
- they will only try the direct queries. If the user sets
- UpdateBridgesFromAuthority 1
- in his config file, then he will try querying the bridge authority
- first for bridges where he knows a digest (if he only knows an IP
- address and ORPort, then his only option is a direct query).
- If the user has at least one working bridge, then he will do further
- queries to the bridge authority through a full three-hop Tor circuit.
- But when bootstrapping, he will make a direct begin_dir-style connection
- to the bridge authority.
- As of Tor 0.2.0.10-alpha, if the user attempts to fetch a descriptor
- from the bridge authority and it returns a 404 not found, the user
- will automatically fall back to trying a direct query. Therefore it is
- recommended that bridge users always set UpdateBridgesFromAuthority,
- since at worst it will delay their fetches a little bit and notify
- the bridge authority of the identity fingerprint (but not location)
- of their intended bridges.
- 3.5. Bridge descriptor retry schedule
- Bridge users try to fetch a descriptor for each bridge (using the
- steps in Section 3.4 above) on startup. Whenever they receive a
- bridge descriptor, they reschedule a new descriptor download for 1
- hour from then.
- If on the other hand it fails, they try again after 15 minutes for the
- first attempt, after 15 minutes for the second attempt, and after 60
- minutes for subsequent attempts.
- In 0.2.1.x we should come up with some smarter retry schedules.
- 3.6. Vidalia integration
- Vidalia 0.0.15 has a new checkbox in its Network config window called
- "My ISP blocks connections to the Tor network." Users who click that
- box change their configuration to:
- TunnelDirConns 1
- PreferTunneledDirConns 1
- Once the box is checked, there is also a section for adding bridge
- identifiers. When at least one bridge identifier is present, Vidalia
- also changes their config to:
- UseBridges 1
- UpdateBridgesFromAuthority 1
- and updates their Bridge config option accordingly.
- 3.7. When should we make TunnelDirConns default
- Right now Tor's directory requests can be filtered on the network,
- and some tools used by Middle Eastern governments even do this. A user
- who wants to circumvent these filters should click the above box in
- Vidalia 0.0.15. But at what point should we make tunneled directory
- requests the default?
- Once proposal 124 (modified TLS handshake) is in place, we should
- consider doing the switch. This might even be in the 0.2.0.x timeframe.
|