2008-10-02 11:29:30 +00:00
|
|
|
Filename: 155-four-hidden-service-improvements.txt
|
|
|
|
Title: Four Improvements of Hidden Service Performance
|
|
|
|
Author: Karsten Loesing, Christian Wilms
|
|
|
|
Created: 25-Sep-2008
|
2017-05-18 13:55:34 +00:00
|
|
|
Status: Closed
|
2008-12-09 16:59:33 +00:00
|
|
|
Implemented-In: 0.2.1.x
|
2008-10-02 11:29:30 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change history:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25-Sep-2008 Initial proposal for or-dev
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overview:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A performance analysis of hidden services [1] has brought up a few
|
|
|
|
possible design changes to reduce advertisement time of a hidden service
|
|
|
|
in the network as well as connection establishment time. Some of these
|
|
|
|
design changes have side-effects on anonymity or overall network load
|
|
|
|
which had to be weighed up against individual performance gains. A
|
2008-10-15 00:36:09 +00:00
|
|
|
discussion of seven possible design changes [2] has led to a selection
|
2008-10-02 11:29:30 +00:00
|
|
|
of four changes [3] that are proposed to be implemented here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Design:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Shorter Circuit Extension Timeout
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When establishing a connection to a hidden service a client cannibalizes
|
|
|
|
an existing circuit and extends it by one hop to one of the service's
|
|
|
|
introduction points. In most cases this can be accomplished within a few
|
|
|
|
seconds. Therefore, the current timeout of 60 seconds for extending a
|
|
|
|
circuit is far too high.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assuming that the timeout would be reduced to a lower value, for example
|
|
|
|
30 seconds, a second (or third) attempt to cannibalize and extend would
|
|
|
|
be started earlier. With the current timeout of 60 seconds, 93.42% of all
|
|
|
|
circuits can be established, whereas this fraction would have been only
|
|
|
|
0.87% smaller at 92.55% with a timeout of 30 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For a timeout of 30 seconds the performance gain would be approximately 2
|
|
|
|
seconds in the mean as opposed to the current timeout of 60 seconds. At
|
|
|
|
the same time a smaller timeout leads to discarding an increasing number
|
|
|
|
of circuits that might have been completed within the current timeout of
|
|
|
|
60 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Measurements with simulated low-bandwidth connectivity have shown that
|
|
|
|
there is no significant effect of client connectivity on circuit
|
|
|
|
extension times. The reason for this might be that extension messages are
|
|
|
|
small and thereby independent of the client bandwidth. Further, the
|
|
|
|
connection between client and entry node only constitutes a single hop of
|
|
|
|
a circuit, so that its influence on the whole circuit is limited.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The exact value of the new timeout does not necessarily have to be 30
|
|
|
|
seconds, but might also depend on the results of circuit build timeout
|
|
|
|
measurements as described in proposal 151.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Parallel Connections to Introduction Points
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An additional approach to accelerate extension of introduction circuits
|
|
|
|
is to extend a second circuit in parallel to a different introduction
|
|
|
|
point. Such parallel extension attempts should be started after a short
|
|
|
|
delay of, e.g., 15 seconds in order to prevent unnecessary circuit
|
|
|
|
extensions and thereby save network resources. Whichever circuit
|
|
|
|
extension succeeds first is used for introduction, while the other
|
|
|
|
attempt is aborted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An evaluation has been performed for the more resource-intensive approach
|
|
|
|
of starting two parallel circuits immediately instead of waiting for a
|
|
|
|
short delay. The result was a reduction of connection establishment times
|
|
|
|
from 27.4 seconds in the original protocol to 22.5 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While the effect of the proposed approach of delayed parallelization on
|
|
|
|
mean connection establishment times is expected to be smaller,
|
|
|
|
variability of connection attempt times can be reduced significantly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Increase Count of Internal Circuits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hidden services need to create or cannibalize and extend a circuit to a
|
|
|
|
rendezvous point for every client request. Really popular hidden services
|
|
|
|
require more than two internal circuits in the pool to answer multiple
|
|
|
|
client requests at the same time. This scenario was not yet analyzed, but
|
|
|
|
will probably exhibit worse performance than measured in the previous
|
|
|
|
analysis. The number of preemptively built internal circuits should be a
|
|
|
|
function of connection requests in the past to adapt to changing needs.
|
|
|
|
Furthermore, an increased number of internal circuits on client side
|
|
|
|
would allow clients to establish connections to more than one hidden
|
|
|
|
service at a time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Under the assumption that a popular hidden service cannot make use of
|
|
|
|
cannibalization for connecting to rendezvous points, the circuit creation
|
|
|
|
time needs to be added to the current results. In the mean, the
|
|
|
|
connection establishment time to a popular hidden service would increase
|
|
|
|
by 4.7 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. Build More Introduction Circuits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When establishing introduction points, a hidden service should launch 5
|
|
|
|
instead of 3 introduction circuits at the same time and use only the
|
|
|
|
first 3 that could be established. The remaining two circuits could still
|
|
|
|
be used for other purposes afterwards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effect has been simulated using previously measured data, too.
|
|
|
|
Therefore, circuit establishment times were derived from log files and
|
|
|
|
written to an array. Afterwards, a simulation with 10,000 runs was
|
|
|
|
performed picking 5 (4, 6) random values and using the 3 lowest values in
|
|
|
|
contrast to picking only 3 values at random. The result is that the mean
|
|
|
|
time of the 3-out-of-3 approach is 8.1 seconds, while the mean time of
|
|
|
|
the 3-out-of-5 approach is 4.4 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effect on network load is minimal, because the hidden service can
|
|
|
|
reuse the slower internal circuits for other purposes, e.g., rendezvous
|
|
|
|
circuits. The only change is that a hidden service starts establishing
|
|
|
|
more circuits at once instead of subsequently doing so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
References:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] http://freehaven.net/~karsten/hidserv/perfanalysis-2008-06-15.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[2] http://freehaven.net/~karsten/hidserv/discussion-2008-07-15.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[3] http://freehaven.net/~karsten/hidserv/design-2008-08-15.pdf
|
|
|
|
|