114-distributed-storage.txt 23 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439
  1. Filename: 114-distributed-storage.txt
  2. Title: Distributed Storage for Tor Hidden Service Descriptors
  3. Author: Karsten Loesing
  4. Created: 13-May-2007
  5. Status: Closed
  6. Implemented-In: 0.2.0.x
  7. Change history:
  8. 13-May-2007 Initial proposal
  9. 14-May-2007 Added changes suggested by Lasse Øverlier
  10. 30-May-2007 Changed descriptor format, key length discussion, typos
  11. 09-Jul-2007 Incorporated suggestions by Roger, added status of specification
  12. and implementation for upcoming GSoC mid-term evaluation
  13. 11-Aug-2007 Updated implementation statuses, included non-consecutive
  14. replication to descriptor format
  15. 20-Aug-2007 Renamed config option HSDir as HidServDirectoryV2
  16. 02-Dec-2007 Closed proposal
  17. Overview:
  18. The basic idea of this proposal is to distribute the tasks of storing and
  19. serving hidden service descriptors from currently three authoritative
  20. directory nodes among a large subset of all onion routers. The three
  21. reasons to do this are better robustness (availability), better
  22. scalability, and improved security properties. Further,
  23. this proposal suggests changes to the hidden service descriptor format to
  24. prevent new security threats coming from decentralization and to gain even
  25. better security properties.
  26. Status:
  27. As of December 2007, the new hidden service descriptor format is implemented
  28. and usable. However, servers and clients do not yet make use of descriptor
  29. cookies, because there are open usability issues of this feature that might
  30. be resolved in proposal 121. Further, hidden service directories do not
  31. perform replication by themselves, because (unauthorized) replica fetch
  32. requests would allow any attacker to fetch all hidden service descriptors in
  33. the system. As neither issue is critical to the functioning of v2
  34. descriptors and their distribution, this proposal is considered as Closed.
  35. Motivation:
  36. The current design of hidden services exhibits the following performance and
  37. security problems:
  38. First, the three hidden service authoritative directories constitute a
  39. performance bottleneck in the system. The directory nodes are responsible for
  40. storing and serving all hidden service descriptors. As of May 2007 there are
  41. about 1000 descriptors at a time, but this number is assumed to increase in
  42. the future. Further, there is no replication protocol for descriptors between
  43. the three directory nodes, so that hidden services must ensure the
  44. availability of their descriptors by manually publishing them on all
  45. directory nodes. Whenever a fourth or fifth hidden service authoritative
  46. directory is added, hidden services will need to maintain an equally
  47. increasing number of replicas. These scalability issues have an impact on the
  48. current usage of hidden services and put an even higher burden on the
  49. development of new kinds of applications for hidden services that might
  50. require storing even more descriptors.
  51. Second, besides posing a limitation to scalability, storing all hidden
  52. service descriptors on three directory nodes also constitutes a security
  53. risk. The directory node operators could easily analyze the publish and fetch
  54. requests to derive information on service activity and usage and read the
  55. descriptor contents to determine which onion routers work as introduction
  56. points for a given hidden service and need to be attacked or threatened to
  57. shut it down. Furthermore, the contents of a hidden service descriptor offer
  58. only minimal security properties to the hidden service. Whoever gets aware of
  59. the service ID can easily find out whether the service is active at the
  60. moment and which introduction points it has. This applies to (former)
  61. clients, (former) introduction points, and of course to the directory nodes.
  62. It requires only to request the descriptor for the given service ID, which
  63. can be performed by anyone anonymously.
  64. This proposal suggests two major changes to approach the described
  65. performance and security problems:
  66. The first change affects the storage location for hidden service descriptors.
  67. Descriptors are distributed among a large subset of all onion routers instead
  68. of three fixed directory nodes. Each storing node is responsible for a subset
  69. of descriptors for a limited time only. It is not able to choose which
  70. descriptors it stores at a certain time, because this is determined by its
  71. onion ID which is hard to change frequently and in time (only routers which
  72. are stable for a given time are accepted as storing nodes). In order to
  73. resist single node failures and untrustworthy nodes, descriptors are
  74. replicated among a certain number of storing nodes. A first replication
  75. protocol makes sure that descriptors don't get lost when the node population
  76. changes; therefore, a storing node periodically requests the descriptors from
  77. its siblings. A second replication protocol distributes descriptors among
  78. non-consecutive nodes of the ID ring to prevent a group of adversaries from
  79. generating new onion keys until they have consecutive IDs to create a 'black
  80. hole' in the ring and make random services unavailable. Connections to
  81. storing nodes are established by extending existing circuits by one hop to
  82. the storing node. This also ensures that contents are encrypted. The effect
  83. of this first change is that the probability that a single node operator
  84. learns about a certain hidden service is very small and that it is very hard
  85. to track a service over time, even when it collaborates with other node
  86. operators.
  87. The second change concerns the content of hidden service descriptors.
  88. Obviously, security problems cannot be solved only by decentralizing storage;
  89. in fact, they could also get worse if done without caution. At first, a
  90. descriptor ID needs to change periodically in order to be stored on changing
  91. nodes over time. Next, the descriptor ID needs to be computable only for the
  92. service's clients, but should be unpredictable for all other nodes. Further,
  93. the storing node needs to be able to verify that the hidden service is the
  94. true originator of the descriptor with the given ID even though it is not a
  95. client. Finally, a storing node should learn as little information as
  96. necessary by storing a descriptor, because it might not be as trustworthy as
  97. a directory node; for example it does not need to know the list of
  98. introduction points. Therefore, a second key is applied that is only known to
  99. the hidden service provider and its clients and that is not included in the
  100. descriptor. It is used to calculate descriptor IDs and to encrypt the
  101. introduction points. This second key can either be given to all clients
  102. together with the hidden service ID, or to a group or a single client as
  103. an authentication token. In the future this second key could be the result of
  104. some key agreement protocol between the hidden service and one or more
  105. clients. A new text-based format is proposed for descriptors instead of an
  106. extension of the existing binary format for reasons of future extensibility.
  107. Design:
  108. The proposed design is described by the required changes to the current
  109. design. These requirements are grouped by content, rather than by affected
  110. specification documents or code files, and numbered for reference below.
  111. Hidden service clients, servers, and directories:
  112. /1/ Create routing list
  113. All participants can filter the consensus status document received from the
  114. directory authorities to one routing list containing only those servers
  115. that store and serve hidden service descriptors and which are running for
  116. at least 24 hours. A participant only trusts its own routing list and never
  117. learns about routing information from other parties.
  118. /2/ Determine responsible hidden service directory
  119. All participants can determine the hidden service directory that is
  120. responsible for storing and serving a given ID, as well as the hidden
  121. service directories that replicate its content. Every hidden service
  122. directory is responsible for the descriptor IDs in the interval from
  123. its predecessor, exclusive, to its own ID, inclusive. Further, a hidden
  124. service directory holds replicas for its n predecessors, where n denotes
  125. the number of consecutive replicas. (requires /1/)
  126. [/3/ and /4/ were requirements to use BEGIN_DIR cells for directory
  127. requests which have not been fulfilled in the course of the implementation
  128. of this proposal, but elsewhere.]
  129. Hidden service directory nodes:
  130. /5/ Advertise hidden service directory functionality
  131. Every onion router that has its directory port open can decide whether it
  132. wants to store and serve hidden service descriptors by setting a new config
  133. option "HidServDirectoryV2" 0|1 to 1. An onion router with this config
  134. option being set includes the flag "hidden-service-dir" in its router
  135. descriptors that it sends to directory authorities.
  136. /6/ Accept v2 publish requests, parse and store v2 descriptors
  137. Hidden service directory nodes accept publish requests for hidden service
  138. descriptors and store them to their local memory. (It is not necessary to
  139. make descriptors persistent, because after disconnecting, the onion router
  140. would not be accepted as storing node anyway, because it has not been
  141. running for at least 24 hours.) All requests and replies are formatted as
  142. HTTP messages. Requests are directed to the router's directory port and are
  143. contained within BEGIN_DIR cells. A hidden service directory node stores a
  144. descriptor only when it thinks that it is responsible for storing that
  145. descriptor based on its own routing table. Every hidden service directory
  146. node is responsible for the descriptor IDs in the interval of its n-th
  147. predecessor in the ID circle up to its own ID (n denotes the number of
  148. consecutive replicas). (requires /1/)
  149. /7/ Accept v2 fetch requests
  150. Same as /6/, but with fetch requests for hidden service descriptors.
  151. (requires /2/)
  152. /8/ Replicate descriptors with neighbors
  153. A hidden service directory node replicates descriptors from its two
  154. predecessors by downloading them once an hour. Further, it checks its
  155. routing table periodically for changes. Whenever it realizes that a
  156. predecessor has left the network, it establishes a connection to the new
  157. n-th predecessor and requests its stored descriptors in the interval of its
  158. (n+1)-th predecessor and the requested n-th predecessor. Whenever it
  159. realizes that a new onion router has joined with an ID higher than its
  160. former n-th predecessor, it adds it to its predecessors and discards all
  161. descriptors in the interval of its (n+1)-th and its n-th predecessor.
  162. (requires /1/)
  163. [Dec 02: This function has not been implemented, because arbitrary nodes
  164. what have been able to download the entire set of v2 descriptors. An
  165. authorized replication request would be necessary. For the moment, the
  166. system runs without any directory-side replication. -KL]
  167. Authoritative directory nodes:
  168. /9/ Confirm a router's hidden service directory functionality
  169. Directory nodes include a new flag "HSDir" for routers that decided to
  170. provide storage for hidden service descriptors and that are running for at
  171. least 24 hours. The last requirement prevents a node from frequently
  172. changing its onion key to become responsible for an identifier it wants to
  173. target.
  174. Hidden service provider:
  175. /10/ Configure v2 hidden service
  176. Each hidden service provider that has set the config option
  177. "PublishV2HidServDescriptors" 0|1 to 1 is configured to publish v2
  178. descriptors and conform to the v2 connection establishment protocol. When
  179. configuring a hidden service, a hidden service provider checks if it has
  180. already created a random secret_cookie and a hostname2 file; if not, it
  181. creates both of them. (requires /2/)
  182. /11/ Establish introduction points with fresh key
  183. If configured to publish only v2 descriptors and no v0/v1 descriptors any
  184. more, a hidden service provider that is setting up the hidden service at
  185. introduction points does not pass its own public key, but the public key
  186. of a freshly generated key pair. It also includes these fresh public keys
  187. in the hidden service descriptor together with the other introduction point
  188. information. The reason is that the introduction point does not need to and
  189. therefore should not know for which hidden service it works, so as to
  190. prevent it from tracking the hidden service's activity. (If a hidden
  191. service provider supports both, v0/v1 and v2 descriptors, v0/v1 clients
  192. rely on the fact that all introduction points accept the same public key,
  193. so that this new feature cannot be used.)
  194. /12/ Encode v2 descriptors and send v2 publish requests
  195. If configured to publish v2 descriptors, a hidden service provider
  196. publishes a new descriptor whenever its content changes or a new
  197. publication period starts for this descriptor. If the current publication
  198. period would only last for less than 60 minutes (= 2 x 30 minutes to allow
  199. the server to be 30 minutes behind and the client 30 minutes ahead), the
  200. hidden service provider publishes both a current descriptor and one for
  201. the next period. Publication is performed by sending the descriptor to all
  202. hidden service directories that are responsible for keeping replicas for
  203. the descriptor ID. This includes two non-consecutive replicas that are
  204. stored at 3 consecutive nodes each. (requires /1/ and /2/)
  205. Hidden service client:
  206. /13/ Send v2 fetch requests
  207. A hidden service client that has set the config option
  208. "FetchV2HidServDescriptors" 0|1 to 1 handles SOCKS requests for v2 onion
  209. addresses by requesting a v2 descriptor from a randomly chosen hidden
  210. service directory that is responsible for keeping replica for the
  211. descriptor ID. In total there are six replicas of which the first and the
  212. last three are stored on consecutive nodes. The probability of picking one
  213. of the three consecutive replicas is 1/6, 2/6, and 3/6 to incorporate the
  214. fact that the availability will be the highest on the node with next higher
  215. ID. A hidden service client relies on the hidden service provider to store
  216. two sets of descriptors to compensate clock skew between service and
  217. client. (requires /1/ and /2/)
  218. /14/ Process v2 fetch reply and parse v2 descriptors
  219. A hidden service client that has sent a request for a v2 descriptor can
  220. parse it and store it to the local cache of rendezvous service descriptors.
  221. /15/ Establish connection to v2 hidden service
  222. A hidden service client can establish a connection to a hidden service
  223. using a v2 descriptor. This includes using the secret cookie for decrypting
  224. the introduction points contained in the descriptor. When contacting an
  225. introduction point, the client does not use the public key of the hidden
  226. service provider, but the freshly-generated public key that is included in
  227. the hidden service descriptor. Whether or not a fresh key is used instead
  228. of the key of the hidden service depends on the available protocol versions
  229. that are included in the descriptor; by this, connection establishment is
  230. to a certain extend decoupled from fetching the descriptor.
  231. Hidden service descriptor:
  232. (Requirements concerning the descriptor format are contained in /6/ and /7/.)
  233. The new v2 hidden service descriptor format looks like this:
  234. onion-address = h(public-key) + cookie
  235. descriptor-id = h(h(public-key) + h(time-period + cookie + relica))
  236. descriptor-content = {
  237. descriptor-id,
  238. version,
  239. public-key,
  240. h(time-period + cookie + replica),
  241. timestamp,
  242. protocol-versions,
  243. { introduction-points } encrypted with cookie
  244. } signed with private-key
  245. The "descriptor-id" needs to change periodically in order for the
  246. descriptor to be stored on changing nodes over time. It may only be
  247. computable by a hidden service provider and all of his clients to prevent
  248. unauthorized nodes from tracking the service activity by periodically
  249. checking whether there is a descriptor for this service. Finally, the
  250. hidden service directory needs to be able to verify that the hidden service
  251. provider is the true originator of the descriptor with the given ID.
  252. Therefore, "descriptor-id" is derived from the "public-key" of the hidden
  253. service provider, the current "time-period" which changes every 24 hours,
  254. a secret "cookie" shared between hidden service provider and clients, and
  255. a "replica" denoting the number of this non-consecutive replica. (The
  256. "time-period" is constructed in a way that time periods do not change at
  257. the same moment for all descriptors by deriving a value between 0:00 and
  258. 23:59 hours from h(public-key) and making the descriptors of this hidden
  259. service provider expire at that time of the day.) The "descriptor-id" is
  260. defined to be 160 bits long. [extending the "descriptor-id" length
  261. suggested by LØ]
  262. Only the hidden service provider and the clients are able to generate
  263. future "descriptor-ID"s. Hence, the "onion-address" is extended from now
  264. the hash value of "public-key" by the secret "cookie". The "public-key" is
  265. determined to be 80 bits long, whereas the "cookie" is dimensioned to be
  266. 120 bits long. This makes a total of 200 bits or 40 base32 chars, which is
  267. quite a lot to handle for a human, but necessary to provide sufficient
  268. protection against an adversary from generating a key pair with same
  269. "public-key" hash or guessing the "cookie".
  270. A hidden service directory can verify that a descriptor was created by the
  271. hidden service provider by checking if the "descriptor-id" corresponds to
  272. the "public-key" and if the signature can be verified with the
  273. "public-key".
  274. The "introduction-points" that are included in the descriptor are encrypted
  275. using the same "cookie" that is shared between hidden service provider and
  276. clients. [correction to use another key than h(time-period + cookie) as
  277. encryption key for introduction points made by LØ]
  278. A new text-based format is proposed for descriptors instead of an extension
  279. of the existing binary format for reasons of future extensibility.
  280. Security implications:
  281. The security implications of the proposed changes are grouped by the roles of
  282. nodes that could perform attacks or on which attacks could be performed.
  283. Attacks by authoritative directory nodes
  284. Authoritative directory nodes are no longer the single places in the
  285. network that know about a hidden service's activity and introduction
  286. points. Thus, they cannot perform attacks using this information, e.g.
  287. track a hidden service's activity or usage pattern or attack its
  288. introduction points. Formerly, it would only require a single corrupted
  289. authoritative directory operator to perform such an attack.
  290. Attacks by hidden service directory nodes
  291. A hidden service directory node could misuse a stored descriptor to track a
  292. hidden service's activity and usage pattern by clients. Though there is no
  293. countermeasure against this kind of attack, it is very expensive to track a
  294. certain hidden service over time. An attacker would need to run a large
  295. number of stable onion routers that work as hidden service directory nodes
  296. to have a good probability to become responsible for its changing
  297. descriptor IDs. For each period, the probability is:
  298. 1-(N-c choose r)/(N choose r) for N-c>=r and 1 otherwise, with N
  299. as total
  300. number of hidden service directories, c as compromised nodes, and r as
  301. number of replicas
  302. The hidden service directory nodes could try to make a certain hidden
  303. service unavailable to its clients. Therefore, they could discard all
  304. stored descriptors for that hidden service and reply to clients that there
  305. is no descriptor for the given ID or return an old or false descriptor
  306. content. The client would detect a false descriptor, because it could not
  307. contain a correct signature. But an old content or an empty reply could
  308. confuse the client. Therefore, the countermeasure is to replicate
  309. descriptors among a small number of hidden service directories, e.g. 5.
  310. The probability of a group of collaborating nodes to make a hidden service
  311. completely unavailable is in each period:
  312. (c choose r)/(N choose r) for c>=r and N>=r, and 0 otherwise,
  313. with N as total
  314. number of hidden service directories, c as compromised nodes, and r as
  315. number of replicas
  316. A hidden service directory could try to find out which introduction points
  317. are working on behalf of a hidden service. In contrast to the previous
  318. design, this is not possible anymore, because this information is encrypted
  319. to the clients of a hidden service.
  320. Attacks on hidden service directory nodes
  321. An anonymous attacker could try to swamp a hidden service directory with
  322. false descriptors for a given descriptor ID. This is prevented by requiring
  323. that descriptors are signed.
  324. Anonymous attackers could swamp a hidden service directory with correct
  325. descriptors for non-existing hidden services. There is no countermeasure
  326. against this attack. However, the creation of valid descriptors is more
  327. expensive than verification and storage in local memory. This should make
  328. this kind of attack unattractive.
  329. Attacks by introduction points
  330. Current or former introduction points could try to gain information on the
  331. hidden service they serve. But due to the fresh key pair that is used by
  332. the hidden service, this attack is not possible anymore.
  333. Attacks by clients
  334. Current or former clients could track a hidden service's activity, attack
  335. its introduction points, or determine the responsible hidden service
  336. directory nodes and attack them. There is nothing that could prevent them
  337. from doing so, because honest clients need the full descriptor content to
  338. establish a connection to the hidden service. At the moment, the only
  339. countermeasure against dishonest clients is to change the secret cookie and
  340. pass it only to the honest clients.
  341. Compatibility:
  342. The proposed design is meant to replace the current design for hidden service
  343. descriptors and their storage in the long run.
  344. There should be a first transition phase in which both, the current design
  345. and the proposed design are served in parallel. Onion routers should start
  346. serving as hidden service directories, and hidden service providers and
  347. clients should make use of the new design if both sides support it. Hidden
  348. service providers should be allowed to publish descriptors of the current
  349. format in parallel, and authoritative directories should continue storing and
  350. serving these descriptors.
  351. After the first transition phase, hidden service providers should stop
  352. publishing descriptors on authoritative directories, and hidden service
  353. clients should not try to fetch descriptors from the authoritative
  354. directories. However, the authoritative directories should continue serving
  355. hidden service descriptors for a second transition phase. As of this point,
  356. all v2 config options should be set to a default value of 1.
  357. After the second transition phase, the authoritative directories should stop
  358. serving hidden service descriptors.