mirror of
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor.git
synced 2024-11-20 10:12:15 +01:00
clean up bib; remove incorrect directory consensus discussion
svn:r1885
This commit is contained in:
parent
fd09a4080b
commit
92c4b3f139
@ -91,7 +91,7 @@
|
||||
|
||||
@inproceedings{eax,
|
||||
author = "M. Bellare and P. Rogaway and D. Wagner",
|
||||
title = "The EAX Mode of Operation: A Two-Pass Authenticated-Encryption Scheme Optimized for Simplicity and Efficiency",
|
||||
title = {The {EAX} Mode of Operation: A Two-Pass Authenticated-Encryption Scheme Optimized for Simplicity and Efficiency},
|
||||
booktitle = {Fast Software Encryption 2004},
|
||||
month = {February},
|
||||
year = {2004},
|
||||
@ -258,7 +258,7 @@
|
||||
@InProceedings{sybil,
|
||||
author = "John Douceur",
|
||||
title = {{The Sybil Attack}},
|
||||
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 1st International Peer To Peer Systems Workshop (IPTPS 2002)",
|
||||
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 1st International Peer To Peer Systems Workshop (IPTPS)",
|
||||
month = Mar,
|
||||
year = 2002,
|
||||
}
|
||||
@ -915,7 +915,7 @@
|
||||
title = {Passive Attack Analysis for Connection-Based Anonymity Systems},
|
||||
author = {Andrei Serjantov and Peter Sewell},
|
||||
booktitle = {Computer Security -- ESORICS 2003},
|
||||
publisher = {Springer-Verlag, LNCS (forthcoming)},
|
||||
publisher = {Springer-Verlag, LNCS 2808},
|
||||
year = {2003},
|
||||
month = {October},
|
||||
}
|
||||
@ -1014,7 +1014,7 @@
|
||||
@InProceedings{p5,
|
||||
author = {Rob Sherwood and Bobby Bhattacharjee and Aravind Srinivasan},
|
||||
title = {$P^5$: A Protocol for Scalable Anonymous Communication},
|
||||
booktitle = {2002 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy},
|
||||
booktitle = {IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy},
|
||||
pages = {58--70},
|
||||
year = 2002,
|
||||
publisher = {IEEE CS}
|
||||
|
@ -1379,39 +1379,16 @@ we make the
|
||||
simplifying assumption that all participants agree on the set of
|
||||
directory servers. Second, while Mixminion needs to predict node
|
||||
behavior, Tor only needs a threshold consensus of the current
|
||||
state of the network.
|
||||
|
||||
% XXXX Do we really want this next part? It isn't really sound, and
|
||||
% XXXX we haven't implemented it. -NM
|
||||
Tor directory servers build a consensus directory through a simple
|
||||
four-round broadcast protocol. In round one, each server dates and
|
||||
signs its current opinion, and broadcasts it to the other directory
|
||||
servers; then in round two, each server rebroadcasts all the signed
|
||||
opinions it has received. At this point all directory servers check
|
||||
to see whether any server has signed multiple opinions in the same
|
||||
period. Such a server is either broken or cheating, so the protocol
|
||||
stops and notifies the administrators, who either remove the cheater
|
||||
or wait for the broken server to be fixed. If there are no
|
||||
discrepancies, each directory server then locally computes an algorithm
|
||||
(described below)
|
||||
on the set of opinions, resulting in a uniform shared directory. In
|
||||
round three servers sign this directory and broadcast it; and finally
|
||||
in round four the servers rebroadcast the directory and all the
|
||||
signatures. If any directory server drops out of the network, its
|
||||
signature is not included on the final directory.
|
||||
|
||||
The rebroadcast steps ensure that a directory server is heard by
|
||||
either all of the other servers or none of them, even when some links
|
||||
are down (assuming that any two directory servers can talk directly or
|
||||
via a third). Broadcasts are feasible because there are relatively few
|
||||
directory servers (currently 3, but we expect as many as 9 as the network
|
||||
scales). Computing the shared directory locally is a straightforward
|
||||
threshold voting process: we include an OR if a majority of directory
|
||||
servers believe it to be good.
|
||||
state of the network. Third, we assume that we can fall back to the
|
||||
human administrators to discover and resolve problems when a concensus
|
||||
directory cannot be reached. Since there are relatively few directory
|
||||
servers (currently 3, but we expect as many as 9 as the network scales),
|
||||
we can afford operations like broadcast to simplify the consensus-building
|
||||
protocol.
|
||||
|
||||
To avoid attacks where a router connects to all the directory servers
|
||||
but refuses to relay traffic from other routers, the directory servers
|
||||
must build circuits and use them to anonymously test router
|
||||
must also build circuits and use them to anonymously test router
|
||||
reliability~\cite{mix-acc}. Unfortunately, this defense is not yet
|
||||
designed or
|
||||
implemented.
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user