On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:31 AM, Casey Rodarmor <ca...@rodarmor.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Griffin Boyce <grif...@cryptolab.net> > wrote: > >> Casey Rodarmor wrote: >> >>> I just thought of an additional perk: The custom distro could >>> blacklist known-bad hardware. >>> >> >> I think this is a really bad idea overall, but I'd be curious to see >> what this would look like in practice. > > > I guess that's what public mailing lists are good for, hearing about random > bad-but-interesting ideas from the public internet ;–) > > >> Do you detect the (unpatched for past five years) Cisco routers on the >> network? Do you flag the Intel processor? Is the closed-source NVIDIA >> driver a dealbreaker? I think that everything around hardware has >> tradeoffs. > > > Yeah, definitely. I think that it would probably be best to start with > really concrete stuff that was definitely known by general consensus to be > problematic. For example, network adapters with mac addresses within a > certain range are banned. I'm not sure if there is hardware out there that > can be identified concretely, but I would assume that if a piece of > hardware can be identified as causing a particular node to do more harm > than good, for example by phoning home and linking outgoing/incoming > traffic streams as being related, then it could refuse to run. I have no > idea if there is any hardware which is known to do, but I would imaging > that some fingerprinting might be possible. For example, a piece of > hardware has to identify itself with some degree of specificity to the > kernel to cause the right driver to be loaded to run it. Unless it has the > ability to modify that signature, then you might be able to stop it from > even being activated. The only way to modify that signature might also > cause it from not even working at all. > > Non-concrete threats can be identified and advised, if the distro judges > that they don't destroy the utility of the node to the network. > Non-critical components can be avoided, for example by not even starting > the graphics card if it has an iffy driver, or operating it in degraded > non-accelerated VGA mode only, or even operating without any graphics at > all. Also, any non-critical hardware component doesn't even need to load > its driver. A normal distro has to try to get every random piece of crap > connected to the box working with no user intervention, because who knows, > maybe someone will want to use a floppy disk some day. This distro can > selectively identify just the hardware that will get it online and only > load that. It may also be able to avoid anything that has volatile storage > and be completely memory resident, or do things that would be crazy for > another distro, like refuse to run if it sees that you've got what looks > like a working CD drive that it isn't be run from. > > In extra crazy mode it could even burn itself to a CDR if there is blank > one in the tray, reboot and run from that to avoid USB keys and hard > drives. Maybe it doesn't even need to load the driver for the USB bus. > > Even if something like this existed and worked well, there'd be a push to >> then just not use whatever software had this bundled with it. >> > > I think that's why a distro would be a good idea, since it isn't there to > accomplish something other than run a relay. A user would probably rather > not run a relay at all if it isn't even working. > > >> Lots of people use Tor on not-great hardware because that's all they >> have access to. > > > They can use the browser bundle, or their own software, or Tails for > interactive use. This would allow users that only care about running a good > relay to self-select. > >> I say that interested people should come up with ideas for how to pull > it off, code it up, put it on github with a large "Danger! High Voltage!" > warning, and get feedback from the rest of the community. =) That's how > people get started and learn. > > Again, super hypothetically, what's the best way to get feedback on this > idea before I write a bunch of code and create yet another distro that > might be totally useless? Ideally I would write a sort of proposal spec, > concretely outlining what the distro would do and how it would achieve > those goals technically. I would include specific features like, "Use > public speed test services on the greater internet to determine connection > speed, and then configure tor to use 10% of that bandwidth". I would not be > looking for any kind of official approval from the Tor project of any kind, > just "This could work in the way that you are describe it working." and "If > this did work and users decided to use it, it would advance the general > goals of internet freedom and privacy." > > I could create a spec on github and invite pull requests for corrections > and issues for unfixable problems with the idea. What mailing lists should > I send it to once I have a first draft?
Hi, (picking random post to reply to) You are abit late on the project idea :) https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/augustgermar/anonabox-a-tor-hardware-router -Jeremy -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
