aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/proposals/125-bridges.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'proposals/125-bridges.txt')
-rw-r--r--proposals/125-bridges.txt17
1 files changed, 17 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/proposals/125-bridges.txt b/proposals/125-bridges.txt
index 3b96ecd..1a3f6c5 100644
--- a/proposals/125-bridges.txt
+++ b/proposals/125-bridges.txt
@@ -329,3 +329,20 @@ Status: Open
Once proposal 124 (modified TLS handshake) is in place, we should
consider doing the switch. This might even be in the 0.2.0.x timeframe.
+3.8. Do we need a second layer of entry guards?
+
+ If the bridge user uses the bridge as its entry guard, then the
+ triangulation attacks from Lasse and Paul's Oakland paper work to
+ locate the user's bridge(s).
+
+ Worse, this is another way to enumerate bridges: if the bridge users
+ keep rotating through second hops, then if you run a few fast servers
+ (and avoid getting considered an Exit or a Guard) you'll quickly get
+ a list of the bridges in active use.
+
+ That's probably the strongest reason why bridge users will need to
+ pick second-layer guards. Would this mean bridge users should switch
+ to four-hop circuits?
+
+ We should figure this out in the 0.2.1.x timeframe.
+