From eugen@leitl.org Thu Aug 29 05:33:42 2013 From: Eugen Leitl To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: [tor-talk] About time to make BitTorrent work over Tor, Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 11:33:36 +0200 Message-ID: <20130829093336.GN29404@leitl.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2561079825974425874==" --===============2561079825974425874== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----- Forwarded message from grarpamp ----- Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 04:09:35 -0400 From: grarpamp To: tor-talk(a)lists.torproject.org Subject: Re: [tor-talk] About time to make BitTorrent work over Tor, Reply-To: tor-talk(a)lists.torproject.org On 8/26/13, Kostas Jakeliunas wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Nathan Suchy < > theusernameiwantistaken(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> I don't want this for piracy as I have a paid VPN account that is much >> faster for that if I decide to pirate. I think we need BitTorrent though >> to >> work on Tor so Tor Users can securely share files with one another. > > > AFAIK the most obvious issue with this (among more subtle side-channel > attack / decloaking problems) is network scalability. Total relay bandwidth > available is, while seemingly increasing in general, very limited given > such use cases. [1] How does one scale BitTorrent on top of that? > ... > But perhaps there's still some discussion to be had. I'm sure this has been > discussed myriads of times, however - maybe it's worth trying to browse > through the mailing list archives. > > [1]: https://metrics.torproject.org/network.html#bandwidth Technically, Bittorrent works fine when run completely inside Tor. The resources needed at the client are reasonable (ie: cpu). The bandwidth is currently reasonably available. And onions are secure enough for people who insist on skirting copyright. That alone makes me wonder why Tor hasn't grown any long lived torrent clouds. Probably because the entry bar is high and the slower speed is beyond the scope of the typical leeching mindset. What people should know is that Tor currently can't handle it at scale in at least two areas... Transferring 1MiB causes about 7MiB worth of reduction in Tor bandwidth, plus the CPU and state for processing the circuits. You can get that back by running relays, but the vast bulk of the above users probably won't be willing or bothered to do that, let alone be able to figure out how to do it right and in conjunction with their BT app. So Tor is likely to tank from that alone. Then assuming they did run relays, the last part is dealing with N million users worth of relay and onion descriptors. That takes out more bandwidth, the dirservers, and everyone's local cpu and ram. For those reasons, it's hard to truly push mass use of p2p over Tor. Yet I think given the greater probability of a p2p influx as time goes on [1], Tor really should have some prepared design considerations on the table beyond "please don't do that", which torrenters obviously ignore. Hopefully designs can be found that aren't restrictive. [1] Pick any hot p2p app, drop N million users worth on Tor. In this thread it's BT... being driven slowly towards anonymous systems by the anti's [today, Russian blocking], enhanced by piratebrowser giving hints to millions of users "Hey, what's this Tor thing? What are these onions I see there? Hmm..." -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk(a)lists.torproject.org To unsusbscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl leitl http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://ativel.com http://postbiota.org AC894EC5: 38A5 5F46 A4FF 59B8 336B 47EE F46E 3489 AC89 4EC5 --===============2561079825974425874==-- From janfrode@tanso.net Fri Aug 30 03:45:11 2013 From: Jan-Frode Myklebust To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: [tor-talk] About time to make BitTorrent work over Tor, Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 09:38:52 +0200 Message-ID: <20130830073852.GA3873@mushkin.tanso.net> In-Reply-To: <20130829093336.GN29404@leitl.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1633651001720281111==" --===============1633651001720281111== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 11:33:36AM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote: > ----- Forwarded message from grarpamp ----- >=20 > On 8/26/13, Kostas Jakeliunas wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Nathan Suchy < > > theusernameiwantistaken(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I don't want this for piracy as I have a paid VPN account that is much > >> faster for that if I decide to pirate. I think we need BitTorrent though > >> to > >> work on Tor so Tor Users can securely share files with one another. > > > > AFAIK the most obvious issue with this (among more subtle side-channel > > attack / decloaking problems) is network scalability. Total relay bandwid= th > > available is, while seemingly increasing in general, very limited given > > such use cases. [1]=20 > > How does one scale BitTorrent on top of that? By adding TOR exit-node functionality into the bittorrent clients, and giving bittorrent credit score to clients with lots of TOR-traffic. That would scale the TOR network, and also give plausible deniability to direct downloads ("wasn't me, it was the TOR exit" ;-) -jf --===============1633651001720281111==-- From meskio@sindominio.net Fri Aug 30 10:12:40 2013 From: Ruben Pollan To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: [tor-talk] About time to make BitTorrent work over Tor, Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 16:10:27 +0200 Message-ID: <20130830141027.6875.96630@hermes> In-Reply-To: <20130830073852.GA3873@mushkin.tanso.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1927552554292430270==" --===============1927552554292430270== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Quoting Jan-Frode Myklebust (2013-08-30 09:38:52) > On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 11:33:36AM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > ----- Forwarded message from grarpamp ----- > > > How does one scale BitTorrent on top of that? >=20 > By adding TOR exit-node functionality into the bittorrent clients, and > giving bittorrent credit score to clients with lots of TOR-traffic. That > would scale the TOR network, and also give plausible deniability to > direct downloads ("wasn't me, it was the TOR exit" ;-) If you have a tor exit-node some sites are block or give you problems, like=20 google, wikipedia or irc.freenode.org. To activate an exit node by default wi= ll=20 annoy a lot of users. --=20 Rub=C3=A9n Poll=C3=A1n | http://meskio.net/ -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-= =3D-=3D-=3D-=3D- My new OpenPGP key: gpg --recv-key 0xC732B1D1C28F4E2F Migration statement from the old key: http://meskio.net/key/statement -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-= =3D-=3D-=3D-=3D- Nos vamos a Croatan. --===============1927552554292430270== Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" MIME-Version: 1.0 LS0tLS1CRUdJTiBQR1AgU0lHTkFUVVJFLS0tLS0KVmVyc2lvbjogR251UEcgdjIuMC4yMSAoR05V L0xpbnV4KQoKaVFJY0JBQUJDZ0FHQlFKU0lLZlRBQW9KRU1jeXNkSENqMDR2d3BnUC9pZlVzSktV QjZVMDdjUGNZekJLNHpWdApyejVOUkcwaytTYXFpdlQ1c1ZMQXFvYjFKdS9hTzl1VDhOeFd6ekxF UitMMDRyLzlYS1B0VlRxRzJWUlBURU91Cm9DVHZkK0plR1cxVGV5djZKNWQ0aHBodm9uR2NrQTY1 UXE2SEFzc2NkT2xGMU1wMXF4eVVOMEVqdkxlLzAwc2MKREE4WkFMakJjSFVERUovVjdsMFdJWVhZ V2FpRjdPS0VpYjY1YXNVODdMVElqOTNacG85UXF6UURiMzNHbGRDWApvYUxxTDNvYlVtait1NWpr Y0k3djQ3a3VQQzJ3TDFyVS9vWm1zVWhDYlZOVGtidnkzREJ2NEVuOS9tajkwY0hvCkx3NzZ6TGZa RTA3ZHRybGtZZjYwSCs0MEpuZ2J5STZJb1l0S1NwemdHUmx6R1Vwa3BKbWY2c2FOZG5WaW4ybUEK R0dmRXJwczJHRmFZNDhpc2kvL3ZoQXArenhCR1NzRjZBWFE1N1NHcXJsRHR2aWRrWTVGQU12SnBC aGxhVVNabApiajZURk1xUzBTQ3RMdUxVN2diR2dZRTFYYmhYUUpPWTFmZi93UGhrUkkxZHBtTkZG SmJWbzF2OHkzVDFKa1ZxCjR5WkNZZHZBZHEzM0hCQmRIQXVySmIwdkd2dXpDS09DQTVoYjFRV3o1 TGVycDBNUWhPZ0tydEE0Z3RoYnlObHAKYTlYNU5La1dNbm51Vi8yRHZPWVdNdDJPbU1LaElwOUt1 Tkp3NWNKTHpONHVRdWNJM3NlMElXSDBFZ3ZzZ2tvSwpnSUNNdFI4M0xMMjlBWGUxTURqd3VkQ250 QXVhN1BYL2lCN2NUbGdhT1AxVHhaejlURUFpWm10Q0ViL3lkelU5Cmw5VDdaZnJiTFBUeWYxcFor UzZzCj00N2JsCi0tLS0tRU5EIFBHUCBTSUdOQVRVUkUtLS0tLQo= --===============1927552554292430270==-- From ei8fdb@ei8fdb.org Fri Aug 30 12:29:14 2013 From: Bernard Tyers - ei8fdb To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: [tor-talk] About time to make BitTorrent work over Tor, Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:29:05 +0100 Message-ID: <7AE7F2BE-E5CB-4C18-9E52-C3BB92CFDAB8@ei8fdb.org> In-Reply-To: <20130830073852.GA3873@mushkin.tanso.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6139082616096427106==" --===============6139082616096427106== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 30 Aug 2013, at 08:38, Jan-Frode Myklebust wrote: > By adding TOR exit-node functionality into the bittorrent clients, and > giving bittorrent credit score to clients with lots of TOR-traffic. That > would scale the TOR network, and also give plausible deniability to > direct downloads ("wasn't me, it was the TOR exit" ;-) I like the idea, but I think that would draw possibly bad coverage to Tor (To= r fuels pirate/illegal download yada yada) , something already they have to d= eal with (Tor is used by paedos/turrists). -------------------------------------- Bernard / bluboxthief / ei8fdb IO91XM / www.ei8fdb.org --===============6139082616096427106== Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" MIME-Version: 1.0 LS0tLS1CRUdJTiBQR1AgU0lHTkFUVVJFLS0tLS0KQ29tbWVudDogR1BHVG9vbHMgLSBodHRwOi8v Z3BndG9vbHMub3JnCgppUUVjQkFFQkFnQUdCUUpTSU1oU0FBb0pFTnN6MUlPN01JcnI3QXdIL2kv RkNDSFlja3RDS0svVXhNdlNmNlQzCmxQZ0tBQnE3Z3c3d1JiTHVQaFgvK3k1Z3hHZmRKMTZ6SVhV ckpnYm1SaVpZR3hJbnp5T0duY1g2UXovV2JSK1cKZExlcXdPRjlIUGhKbSt4MXg5djh2Nysva3h1 b04reUx6TUpXK252alViYVl5Mi84enhVdmNtb1pYdkNBRStUYgpqRi82YXFaMXkrTzZJTmxHSGVH THQ3bkovQUNLVWwvaHdyeWJSYmVrdXVNYUUzZG8vWVhtdE9WV3k0SW5yaCs3CkxHOURYNXgzZnR0 S0REQmVhZVBGWUV6L0szWTVRYXgyK2dKNEowZWZ5b2Ztb05ra01CTHBFM2RWbC81U3VQemkKb0tq LyswM05VVTVFK3B4UWRhbkY4cERYbWNGdW12VDZpekRobkxEZW1kd2w2RS9HM0ZqV2Q0L1pkKytQ TUFZPQo9K1pLcgotLS0tLUVORCBQR1AgU0lHTkFUVVJFLS0tLS0K --===============6139082616096427106==-- From grarpamp@gmail.com Fri Aug 30 15:21:24 2013 From: grarpamp To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: [tor-talk] About time to make BitTorrent work over Tor, Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 15:21:16 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20130830073852.GA3873@mushkin.tanso.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9082745920309102183==" --===============9082745920309102183== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 8/30/13, Jan-Frode Myklebust wrote: >> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Nathan Suchy >> >> I don't want this for piracy as I have a paid VPN account that is much >> >> faster for that if I decide to pirate. I think we need BitTorrent >> >> though >> >> to >> >> work on Tor so Tor Users can securely share files with one another. >> > AFAIK the most obvious issue with this (among more subtle side-channel >> > attack / decloaking problems) is network scalability. Total relay >> > bandwidth >> > available is, while seemingly increasing in general, very limited given >> > such use cases. [1] >> > How does one scale BitTorrent on top of that? > By adding TOR exit-node functionality into the bittorrent clients, and > giving bittorrent credit score to clients with lots of TOR-traffic. That > would scale the TOR network ... Tor does not currently scale as simply as that. Therefore whatever you try to scale on top of Tor will not scale either. All using exits will do (roughly speaking) is cause Tor to fail 1/2 as fast as using the purely internal approach would. BT is further badly hampered since UDP and inbound bindings are unavailable under the current exit model. Tor's design is generally "move a lot of browsers over a few exits", anything else is bonus, at least historically. At the moment, if you're trying to move to millions of p2p users, not just hundreds of tinkerers, you're better off enhancing Tor first or writing or finding another secure transport that scales better. Then moving it all off the clearnet once and for all. But that appears to be beyond the typical scope of thinking in the BT space, you know, because it's not fast and it's sooo harrrddddd man. Tor is good stuff, but like anything else, only good when used within its model. Supposedly i2p welcomes torrenting. Millions? Ask i2p. > ... and also give plausible deniability to > direct downloads ("wasn't me, it was the TOR exit" ;-) No, not really. --===============9082745920309102183==--