diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/contrib/torel-design.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/contrib/torel-design.txt | 181 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 181 deletions
diff --git a/doc/contrib/torel-design.txt b/doc/contrib/torel-design.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 610cbe21f8..0000000000 --- a/doc/contrib/torel-design.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,181 +0,0 @@ -Design For A Tor DNS-based Exit List - -Status: - - This is a suggested design for a DNS Exit List (DNSEL) for Tor exit nodes. - See http://exitlist.torproject.org/ for an implementation. - -Why? - - It's useful for third parties to be able to tell when a given connection - is coming from a Tor exit node. Potential applications range from - "anonymous user" cloaks on IRC networks like oftc, to networks like - Freenode that apply special authentication rules to users from these - IPs, to systems like Wikipedia that may want to make a priority of - _unblocking_ shared IPs more liberally than non-shared IPs, since shared - IPs presumably have non-abusive users as well as abusive ones. - - Since Tor provides exit policies, not every Tor server will connect to - every address:port combination on the Internet. Unless you're trying to - penalize hosts for supporting anonymity, it makes more sense to answer - the fine-grained question "which Tor servers will connect to _me_?" than - the coarse-grained question "which Tor servers exist?" The fine-grained - approach also helps Tor server ops who share an IP with their Tor - server: if they want to access a site that blocks Tor users, they - can exclude that site from their exit policy, and the site can learn - that they won't send it anonymous connections. - - Tor already ships with a tool (the "contrib/exitlist" script) to - identify which Tor nodes might open anonymous connections to any given - exit address. But this is a bit tricky to set up, so only sites like - Freenode and OFTC that are dedicated to privacy use it. - Conversely, providers of some DNSEL implementations are providing - coarse-grained lists of Tor hosts -- sometimes even listing servers that - permit no exit connections at all. This is rather a problem, since - support for DNSEL is pretty ubiquitous. - - -How? - - Keep a running Tor instance, and parse the cached-routers and - cached-routers.new files as new routers arrive. To tell whether a given - server allows connections to a certain address:port combo, look at the - definitions in dir-spec.txt or follow the logic of the current exitlist - script. If bug 405 is still open when you work on this - (https://bugs.torproject.org/flyspray/index.php?do=details&id=405), you'll - probably want to extend it to look at only the newest descriptor for - each server, so you don't use obsolete exit policy data. - - FetchUselessDescriptors would probably be a good torrc option to enable. - - If you're also running a directory cache, you get extra-fresh - information. - - -The DNS interface - - Standard DNSEL, if I understand right, looks like this: There's some - authoritative name server for foo.example.com. You want to know if - 1.2.3.4 is in the list, so you query for an A record for - 4.3.2.1.foo.example.com. If the record exists and has the value - 127.0.0.2[DNSBL-EMAIL], 1.2.3.4 is in the list. If you get an NXDOMAIN - error, 1.2.3.4 is not in the list. If you ask for a domain name outside - of the foo.example.com zone, you get a Server Failure error[RFC 1035]. - - Assume that the DNSEL answers queries authoritatively for some zone, - torhosts.example.com. Below are some queries that could be supported, - though some of them are possibly a bad idea. - - - Query type 1: "General IP:Port" - - Format: - {IP1}.{port}.{IP2}.ip-port.torhosts.example.com - - Rule: - Iff {IP1} is a Tor server that permits connections to {port} on - {IP2}, then there should be an A record with the value 127.0.0.2. - - Example: - "1.0.0.10.80.4.3.2.1.ip-port.torhosts.example.com" should have the - value 127.0.0.2 if and only if there is a Tor server at 10.0.0.1 - that allows connections to port 80 on 1.2.3.4. - - Example use: - I'm running an IRC server at w.x.y.z:9999, and I want to tell - whether an incoming connection is from a Tor server. I set - up my IRC server to give a special mask to any user coming from - an IP listed in 9999.z.y.x.w.ip-port.torhosts.example.com. - - Later, when I get a connection from a.b.c.d, my ircd looks up - "d.c.b.a.9999.z.y.x.w.ip-port.torhosts.example.com" to see - if it's a Tor server that allows connections to my ircd. - - - Query type 2: "IP-port group" - - Format: - {IP}.{listname}.list.torhosts.example.com - - Rule: - Iff this Tor server is configured with an IP:Port list named - {listname}, and {IP} is a Tor server that permits connections to - any member of {listname}, then there exists an A record. - - Example: - Suppose torhosts.example.com has a list of IP:Port called "foo". - There is an A record for 4.3.2.1.foo.list.torhosts.example.com - if and only if 1.2.3.4 is a Tor server that permits connections - to one of the addresses in list "foo". - - Example use: - Suppose torhosts.example.com has a list of hosts in "examplenet", - a popular IRC network. Rather than having them each set up to - query the appropriate "ip-port" list, they could instead all be - set to query a central examplenet.list.torhosts.example.com. - - Problems: - We'd be better off if each individual server queried about hosts - that allowed connections to itself. That way, if I wanted to - allow anonymous connections to foonet, but I wanted to be able to - connect to foonet from my own IP without being marked, I could add - just a few foonet addresses to my exit policy. - - - Query type 3: "My IP, with port" - - Format: - {IP}.{port}.me.torhosts.example.com - - Rule: - An A record exists iff there is a tor server at {IP} that permits - connections to {port} on the host that requested the lookup. - - Example: - "4.3.2.1.80.me.torhosts.example.com" should have an A record if - and only if there is a Tor server at 1.2.3.4 that allows - connections to port 80 of the querying host. - - Example use: - Somebody wants to set up a quick-and-dirty Tor detector for a - single webserver: just point them at 80.me.torhosts.example.com. - - Problem: - This would be easiest to use, but DNS gets in the way. If you - create DNS records that give different results depending on who is - asking, you mess up caching. There could be a fix here, but might - not. - - - RECOMMENDATION: Just build ip-port for now, and see what demand is - like. There's no point in building mechanisms nobody wants. - -Web interface: - - Should provide the same data as the dns interface. - -Other issues: - - After a Tor server op turns off their server, it stops publishing server - descriptors. We should consider that server's IP address to still - represent a Tor node until 48 hours after its last descriptor was - published. - - 30-60 minutes is not an unreasonable TTL. - - There could be some demand for address masks and port lists. Address - masks wider than /8 make me nervous here, as do port ranges. - - We need an answer for what to do about hosts which exit from different - IPs than their advertised IP. One approach would be for the DNSEL - to launch periodic requests to itself through all exit servers whose - policies allow it -- and then see where the requests actually come from. - -References: - - [DNSBL-EMAIL] Levine, J., "DNS Based Blacklists and Whitelists for - E-Mail", http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-asrg-dnsbl-02, November - 2005. - - [RFC 1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Implementation and - Specification", RFC 1035, November 1987. |