mirror of
https://github.com/torproject/torspec.git
synced 2024-11-23 17:59:42 +00:00
c51fa4c53e
It has no independent existence outside of the encryption algorithm of 2.5.3.
2717 lines
114 KiB
Plaintext
2717 lines
114 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
Tor Rendezvous Specification - Version 3
|
|
|
|
This document specifies how the hidden service version 3 protocol works. This
|
|
text used to be proposal 224-rend-spec-ng.txt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table of contents:
|
|
|
|
0. Hidden services: overview and preliminaries.
|
|
0.1. Improvements over previous versions.
|
|
0.2. Notation and vocabulary
|
|
0.3. Cryptographic building blocks
|
|
0.4. Protocol building blocks [BUILDING-BLOCKS]
|
|
0.5. Assigned relay cell types
|
|
0.6. Acknowledgments
|
|
1. Protocol overview
|
|
1.1. View from 10,000 feet
|
|
1.2. In more detail: naming hidden services [NAMING]
|
|
1.3. In more detail: Access control [IMD:AC]
|
|
1.4. In more detail: Distributing hidden service descriptors. [IMD:DIST]
|
|
1.5. In more detail: Scaling to multiple hosts
|
|
1.6. In more detail: Backward compatibility with older hidden service
|
|
1.7. In more detail: Keeping crypto keys offline
|
|
1.8. In more detail: Encryption Keys And Replay Resistance
|
|
1.9. In more detail: A menagerie of keys
|
|
1.9.1. In even more detail: Client authorization [CLIENT-AUTH]
|
|
2. Generating and publishing hidden service descriptors [HSDIR]
|
|
2.1. Deriving blinded keys and subcredentials [SUBCRED]
|
|
2.2. Locating, uploading, and downloading hidden service descriptors
|
|
2.2.1. Dividing time into periods [TIME-PERIODS]
|
|
2.2.2. When to publish a hidden service descriptor [WHEN-HSDESC]
|
|
2.2.3. Where to publish a hidden service descriptor [WHERE-HSDESC]
|
|
2.2.4. Using time periods and SRVs to fetch/upload HS descriptors
|
|
2.2.5. Expiring hidden service descriptors [EXPIRE-DESC]
|
|
2.2.6. URLs for anonymous uploading and downloading
|
|
2.3. Publishing shared random values [PUB-SHAREDRANDOM]
|
|
2.3.1. Client behavior in the absence of shared random values
|
|
2.3.2. Hidden services and changing shared random values
|
|
2.4. Hidden service descriptors: outer wrapper [DESC-OUTER]
|
|
2.5. Hidden service descriptors: encryption format [HS-DESC-ENC]
|
|
2.5.1. First layer of encryption [HS-DESC-FIRST-LAYER]
|
|
2.5.1.1. First layer encryption logic
|
|
2.5.1.2. First layer plaintext format
|
|
2.5.1.3. Client behavior
|
|
2.5.1.4. Obfuscating the number of authorized clients
|
|
2.5.2. Second layer of encryption [HS-DESC-SECOND-LAYER]
|
|
2.5.2.1. Second layer encryption keys
|
|
2.5.2.2. Second layer plaintext format
|
|
2.5.3. Deriving hidden service descriptor encryption keys [HS-DESC-ENCRYPTION-KEYS]
|
|
3. The introduction protocol [INTRO-PROTOCOL]
|
|
3.1. Registering an introduction point [REG_INTRO_POINT]
|
|
3.1.1. Extensible ESTABLISH_INTRO protocol. [EST_INTRO]
|
|
3.1.1.1. Denial-of-Server Defense Extension. [EST_INTRO_DOS_EXT]
|
|
3.1.2. Registering an introduction point on a legacy Tor node [LEGACY_EST_INTRO]
|
|
3.1.3. Acknowledging establishment of introduction point [INTRO_ESTABLISHED]
|
|
3.2. Sending an INTRODUCE1 cell to the introduction point. [SEND_INTRO1]
|
|
3.2.1. INTRODUCE1 cell format [FMT_INTRO1]
|
|
3.2.2. INTRODUCE_ACK cell format. [INTRO_ACK]
|
|
3.3. Processing an INTRODUCE2 cell at the hidden service. [PROCESS_INTRO2]
|
|
3.3.1. Introduction handshake encryption requirements [INTRO-HANDSHAKE-REQS]
|
|
3.3.2. Example encryption handshake: ntor with extra data [NTOR-WITH-EXTRA-DATA]
|
|
3.4. Authentication during the introduction phase. [INTRO-AUTH]
|
|
3.4.1. Ed25519-based authentication.
|
|
4. The rendezvous protocol
|
|
4.1. Establishing a rendezvous point [EST_REND_POINT]
|
|
4.2. Joining to a rendezvous point [JOIN_REND]
|
|
4.2.1. Key expansion
|
|
4.3. Using legacy hosts as rendezvous points
|
|
5. Encrypting data between client and host
|
|
6. Encoding onion addresses [ONIONADDRESS]
|
|
7. Open Questions:
|
|
|
|
-1. Draft notes
|
|
|
|
This document describes a proposed design and specification for
|
|
hidden services in Tor version 0.2.5.x or later. It's a replacement
|
|
for the current rend-spec.txt, rewritten for clarity and for improved
|
|
design.
|
|
|
|
Look for the string "TODO" below: it describes gaps or uncertainties
|
|
in the design.
|
|
|
|
Change history:
|
|
|
|
2013-11-29: Proposal first numbered. Some TODO and XXX items remain.
|
|
|
|
2014-01-04: Clarify some unclear sections.
|
|
|
|
2014-01-21: Fix a typo.
|
|
|
|
2014-02-20: Move more things to the revised certificate format in the
|
|
new updated proposal 220.
|
|
|
|
2015-05-26: Fix two typos.
|
|
|
|
|
|
0. Hidden services: overview and preliminaries.
|
|
|
|
Hidden services aim to provide responder anonymity for bidirectional
|
|
stream-based communication on the Tor network. Unlike regular Tor
|
|
connections, where the connection initiator receives anonymity but
|
|
the responder does not, hidden services attempt to provide
|
|
bidirectional anonymity.
|
|
|
|
Participants:
|
|
|
|
Operator -- A person running a hidden service
|
|
|
|
Host, "Server" -- The Tor software run by the operator to provide
|
|
a hidden service.
|
|
|
|
User -- A person contacting a hidden service.
|
|
|
|
Client -- The Tor software running on the User's computer
|
|
|
|
Hidden Service Directory (HSDir) -- A Tor node that hosts signed
|
|
statements from hidden service hosts so that users can make
|
|
contact with them.
|
|
|
|
Introduction Point -- A Tor node that accepts connection requests
|
|
for hidden services and anonymously relays those requests to the
|
|
hidden service.
|
|
|
|
Rendezvous Point -- A Tor node to which clients and servers
|
|
connect and which relays traffic between them.
|
|
|
|
0.1. Improvements over previous versions.
|
|
|
|
Here is a list of improvements of this proposal over the legacy hidden
|
|
services:
|
|
|
|
a) Better crypto (replaced SHA1/DH/RSA1024 with SHA3/ed25519/curve25519)
|
|
b) Improved directory protocol leaking less to directory servers.
|
|
c) Improved directory protocol with smaller surface for targeted attacks.
|
|
d) Better onion address security against impersonation.
|
|
e) More extensible introduction/rendezvous protocol.
|
|
f) Offline keys for onion services
|
|
g) Advanced client authorization
|
|
|
|
0.2. Notation and vocabulary
|
|
|
|
Unless specified otherwise, all multi-octet integers are big-endian.
|
|
|
|
We write sequences of bytes in two ways:
|
|
|
|
1. A sequence of two-digit hexadecimal values in square brackets,
|
|
as in [AB AD 1D EA].
|
|
|
|
2. A string of characters enclosed in quotes, as in "Hello". The
|
|
characters in these strings are encoded in their ascii
|
|
representations; strings are NOT nul-terminated unless
|
|
explicitly described as NUL terminated.
|
|
|
|
We use the words "byte" and "octet" interchangeably.
|
|
|
|
We use the vertical bar | to denote concatenation.
|
|
|
|
We use INT_N(val) to denote the network (big-endian) encoding of the
|
|
unsigned integer "val" in N bytes. For example, INT_4(1337) is [00 00
|
|
05 39]. Values are truncated like so: val % (2 ^ (N * 8)). For example,
|
|
INT_4(42) is 42 % 4294967296 (32 bit).
|
|
|
|
0.3. Cryptographic building blocks
|
|
|
|
This specification uses the following cryptographic building blocks:
|
|
|
|
* A pseudorandom number generator backed by a strong entropy source.
|
|
The output of the PRNG should always be hashed before being posted on
|
|
the network to avoid leaking raw PRNG bytes to the network
|
|
(see [PRNG-REFS]).
|
|
|
|
* A stream cipher STREAM(iv, k) where iv is a nonce of length
|
|
S_IV_LEN bytes and k is a key of length S_KEY_LEN bytes.
|
|
|
|
* A public key signature system SIGN_KEYGEN()->seckey, pubkey;
|
|
SIGN_SIGN(seckey,msg)->sig; and SIGN_CHECK(pubkey, sig, msg) ->
|
|
{ "OK", "BAD" }; where secret keys are of length SIGN_SECKEY_LEN
|
|
bytes, public keys are of length SIGN_PUBKEY_LEN bytes, and
|
|
signatures are of length SIGN_SIG_LEN bytes.
|
|
|
|
This signature system must also support key blinding operations
|
|
as discussed in appendix [KEYBLIND] and in section [SUBCRED]:
|
|
SIGN_BLIND_SECKEY(seckey, blind)->seckey2 and
|
|
SIGN_BLIND_PUBKEY(pubkey, blind)->pubkey2 .
|
|
|
|
* A public key agreement system "PK", providing
|
|
PK_KEYGEN()->seckey, pubkey; PK_VALID(pubkey) -> {"OK", "BAD"};
|
|
and PK_HANDSHAKE(seckey, pubkey)->output; where secret keys are
|
|
of length PK_SECKEY_LEN bytes, public keys are of length
|
|
PK_PUBKEY_LEN bytes, and the handshake produces outputs of
|
|
length PK_OUTPUT_LEN bytes.
|
|
|
|
* A cryptographic hash function H(d), which should be preimage and
|
|
collision resistant. It produces hashes of length HASH_LEN
|
|
bytes.
|
|
|
|
* A cryptographic message authentication code MAC(key,msg) that
|
|
produces outputs of length MAC_LEN bytes.
|
|
|
|
* A key derivation function KDF(message, n) that outputs n bytes.
|
|
|
|
As a first pass, I suggest:
|
|
|
|
* Instantiate STREAM with AES256-CTR.
|
|
|
|
* Instantiate SIGN with Ed25519 and the blinding protocol in
|
|
[KEYBLIND].
|
|
|
|
* Instantiate PK with Curve25519.
|
|
|
|
* Instantiate H with SHA3-256.
|
|
|
|
* Instantiate KDF with SHAKE-256.
|
|
|
|
* Instantiate MAC(key=k, message=m) with H(k_len | k | m),
|
|
where k_len is htonll(len(k)).
|
|
|
|
For legacy purposes, we specify compatibility with older versions of
|
|
the Tor introduction point and rendezvous point protocols. These used
|
|
RSA1024, DH1024, AES128, and SHA1, as discussed in
|
|
rend-spec.txt.
|
|
|
|
As in [proposal 220], all signatures are generated not over strings
|
|
themselves, but over those strings prefixed with a distinguishing
|
|
value.
|
|
|
|
0.4. Protocol building blocks [BUILDING-BLOCKS]
|
|
|
|
In sections below, we need to transmit the locations and identities
|
|
of Tor nodes. We do so in the link identification format used by
|
|
EXTEND2 cells in the Tor protocol.
|
|
|
|
NSPEC (Number of link specifiers) [1 byte]
|
|
NSPEC times:
|
|
LSTYPE (Link specifier type) [1 byte]
|
|
LSLEN (Link specifier length) [1 byte]
|
|
LSPEC (Link specifier) [LSLEN bytes]
|
|
|
|
Link specifier types are as described in tor-spec.txt. Every set of
|
|
link specifiers MUST include at minimum specifiers of type [00]
|
|
(TLS-over-TCP, IPv4), [02] (legacy node identity) and [03] (ed25519
|
|
identity key).
|
|
|
|
As of 0.4.1.1-alpha, Tor includes both IPv4 and IPv6 link specifiers
|
|
in v3 onion service protocol link specifier lists. All available
|
|
addresses SHOULD be included as link specifiers, regardless of the
|
|
address that Tor actually used to connect/extend to the remote relay.
|
|
|
|
We also incorporate Tor's circuit extension handshakes, as used in
|
|
the CREATE2 and CREATED2 cells described in tor-spec.txt. In these
|
|
handshakes, a client who knows a public key for a server sends a
|
|
message and receives a message from that server. Once the exchange is
|
|
done, the two parties have a shared set of forward-secure key
|
|
material, and the client knows that nobody else shares that key
|
|
material unless they control the secret key corresponding to the
|
|
server's public key.
|
|
|
|
0.5. Assigned relay cell types
|
|
|
|
These relay cell types are reserved for use in the hidden service
|
|
protocol.
|
|
|
|
32 -- RELAY_COMMAND_ESTABLISH_INTRO
|
|
|
|
Sent from hidden service host to introduction point;
|
|
establishes introduction point. Discussed in
|
|
[REG_INTRO_POINT].
|
|
|
|
33 -- RELAY_COMMAND_ESTABLISH_RENDEZVOUS
|
|
|
|
Sent from client to rendezvous point; creates rendezvous
|
|
point. Discussed in [EST_REND_POINT].
|
|
|
|
34 -- RELAY_COMMAND_INTRODUCE1
|
|
|
|
Sent from client to introduction point; requests
|
|
introduction. Discussed in [SEND_INTRO1]
|
|
|
|
35 -- RELAY_COMMAND_INTRODUCE2
|
|
|
|
Sent from introduction point to hidden service host; requests
|
|
introduction. Same format as INTRODUCE1. Discussed in
|
|
[FMT_INTRO1] and [PROCESS_INTRO2]
|
|
|
|
36 -- RELAY_COMMAND_RENDEZVOUS1
|
|
|
|
Sent from hidden service host to rendezvous point;
|
|
attempts to join host's circuit to
|
|
client's circuit. Discussed in [JOIN_REND]
|
|
|
|
37 -- RELAY_COMMAND_RENDEZVOUS2
|
|
|
|
Sent from rendezvous point to client;
|
|
reports join of host's circuit to
|
|
client's circuit. Discussed in [JOIN_REND]
|
|
|
|
38 -- RELAY_COMMAND_INTRO_ESTABLISHED
|
|
|
|
Sent from introduction point to hidden service host;
|
|
reports status of attempt to establish introduction
|
|
point. Discussed in [INTRO_ESTABLISHED]
|
|
|
|
39 -- RELAY_COMMAND_RENDEZVOUS_ESTABLISHED
|
|
|
|
Sent from rendezvous point to client; acknowledges
|
|
receipt of ESTABLISH_RENDEZVOUS cell. Discussed in
|
|
[EST_REND_POINT]
|
|
|
|
40 -- RELAY_COMMAND_INTRODUCE_ACK
|
|
|
|
Sent from introduction point to client; acknowledges
|
|
receipt of INTRODUCE1 cell and reports success/failure.
|
|
Discussed in [INTRO_ACK]
|
|
|
|
0.6. Acknowledgments
|
|
|
|
This design includes ideas from many people, including
|
|
|
|
Christopher Baines,
|
|
Daniel J. Bernstein,
|
|
Matthew Finkel,
|
|
Ian Goldberg,
|
|
George Kadianakis,
|
|
Aniket Kate,
|
|
Tanja Lange,
|
|
Robert Ransom,
|
|
Roger Dingledine,
|
|
Aaron Johnson,
|
|
Tim Wilson-Brown ("teor"),
|
|
special (John Brooks),
|
|
s7r
|
|
|
|
It's based on Tor's original hidden service design by Roger
|
|
Dingledine, Nick Mathewson, and Paul Syverson, and on improvements to
|
|
that design over the years by people including
|
|
|
|
Tobias Kamm,
|
|
Thomas Lauterbach,
|
|
Karsten Loesing,
|
|
Alessandro Preite Martinez,
|
|
Robert Ransom,
|
|
Ferdinand Rieger,
|
|
Christoph Weingarten,
|
|
Christian Wilms,
|
|
|
|
We wouldn't be able to do any of this work without good attack
|
|
designs from researchers including
|
|
|
|
Alex Biryukov,
|
|
Lasse Øverlier,
|
|
Ivan Pustogarov,
|
|
Paul Syverson,
|
|
Ralf-Philipp Weinmann,
|
|
|
|
See [ATTACK-REFS] for their papers.
|
|
|
|
Several of these ideas have come from conversations with
|
|
|
|
Christian Grothoff,
|
|
Brian Warner,
|
|
Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn,
|
|
|
|
And if this document makes any sense at all, it's thanks to
|
|
editing help from
|
|
|
|
Matthew Finkel,
|
|
George Kadianakis,
|
|
Peter Palfrader,
|
|
Tim Wilson-Brown ("teor"),
|
|
|
|
|
|
[XXX Acknowledge the huge bunch of people working on 8106.]
|
|
[XXX Acknowledge the huge bunch of people working on 8244.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please forgive me if I've missed you; please forgive me if I've
|
|
misunderstood your best ideas here too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Protocol overview
|
|
|
|
In this section, we outline the hidden service protocol. This section
|
|
omits some details in the name of simplicity; those are given more
|
|
fully below, when we specify the protocol in more detail.
|
|
|
|
1.1. View from 10,000 feet
|
|
|
|
A hidden service host prepares to offer a hidden service by choosing
|
|
several Tor nodes to serve as its introduction points. It builds
|
|
circuits to those nodes, and tells them to forward introduction
|
|
requests to it using those circuits.
|
|
|
|
Once introduction points have been picked, the host builds a set of
|
|
documents called "hidden service descriptors" (or just "descriptors"
|
|
for short) and uploads them to a set of HSDir nodes. These documents
|
|
list the hidden service's current introduction points and describe
|
|
how to make contact with the hidden service.
|
|
|
|
When a client wants to connect to a hidden service, it first chooses
|
|
a Tor node at random to be its "rendezvous point" and builds a
|
|
circuit to that rendezvous point. If the client does not have an
|
|
up-to-date descriptor for the service, it contacts an appropriate
|
|
HSDir and requests such a descriptor.
|
|
|
|
The client then builds an anonymous circuit to one of the hidden
|
|
service's introduction points listed in its descriptor, and gives the
|
|
introduction point an introduction request to pass to the hidden
|
|
service. This introduction request includes the target rendezvous
|
|
point and the first part of a cryptographic handshake.
|
|
|
|
Upon receiving the introduction request, the hidden service host
|
|
makes an anonymous circuit to the rendezvous point and completes the
|
|
cryptographic handshake. The rendezvous point connects the two
|
|
circuits, and the cryptographic handshake gives the two parties a
|
|
shared key and proves to the client that it is indeed talking to the
|
|
hidden service.
|
|
|
|
Once the two circuits are joined, the client can send Tor RELAY cells
|
|
to the server. RELAY_BEGIN cells open streams to an external process
|
|
or processes configured by the server; RELAY_DATA cells are used to
|
|
communicate data on those streams, and so forth.
|
|
|
|
1.2. In more detail: naming hidden services [NAMING]
|
|
|
|
A hidden service's name is its long term master identity key. This is
|
|
encoded as a hostname by encoding the entire key in Base 32, including a
|
|
version byte and a checksum, and then appending the string ".onion" at the
|
|
end. The result is a 56-character domain name.
|
|
|
|
(This is a change from older versions of the hidden service protocol,
|
|
where we used an 80-bit truncated SHA1 hash of a 1024 bit RSA key.)
|
|
|
|
The names in this format are distinct from earlier names because of
|
|
their length. An older name might look like:
|
|
|
|
unlikelynamefora.onion
|
|
yyhws9optuwiwsns.onion
|
|
|
|
And a new name following this specification might look like:
|
|
|
|
l5satjgud6gucryazcyvyvhuxhr74u6ygigiuyixe3a6ysis67ororad.onion
|
|
|
|
Please see section [ONIONADDRESS] for the encoding specification.
|
|
|
|
1.3. In more detail: Access control [IMD:AC]
|
|
|
|
Access control for a hidden service is imposed at multiple points through
|
|
the process above. Furthermore, there is also the option to impose
|
|
additional client authorization access control using pre-shared secrets
|
|
exchanged out-of-band between the hidden service and its clients.
|
|
|
|
The first stage of access control happens when downloading HS descriptors.
|
|
Specifically, in order to download a descriptor, clients must know which
|
|
blinded signing key was used to sign it. (See the next section for more info
|
|
on key blinding.)
|
|
|
|
To learn the introduction points, clients must decrypt the body of the
|
|
hidden service descriptor. To do so, clients must know the _unblinded_
|
|
public key of the service, which makes the descriptor unusable by entities
|
|
without that knowledge (e.g. HSDirs that don't know the onion address).
|
|
|
|
Also, if optional client authorization is enabled, hidden service
|
|
descriptors are superencrypted using each authorized user's identity x25519
|
|
key, to further ensure that unauthorized entities cannot decrypt it.
|
|
|
|
In order to make the introduction point send a rendezvous request to the
|
|
service, the client needs to use the per-introduction-point authentication
|
|
key found in the hidden service descriptor.
|
|
|
|
The final level of access control happens at the server itself, which may
|
|
decide to respond or not respond to the client's request depending on the
|
|
contents of the request. The protocol is extensible at this point: at a
|
|
minimum, the server requires that the client demonstrate knowledge of the
|
|
contents of the encrypted portion of the hidden service descriptor. If
|
|
optional client authorization is enabled, the service may additionally
|
|
require the client to prove knowledge of a pre-shared private key.
|
|
|
|
1.4. In more detail: Distributing hidden service descriptors. [IMD:DIST]
|
|
|
|
Periodically, hidden service descriptors become stored at different
|
|
locations to prevent a single directory or small set of directories
|
|
from becoming a good DoS target for removing a hidden service.
|
|
|
|
For each period, the Tor directory authorities agree upon a
|
|
collaboratively generated random value. (See section 2.3 for a
|
|
description of how to incorporate this value into the voting
|
|
practice; generating the value is described in other proposals,
|
|
including [SHAREDRANDOM-REFS].) That value, combined with hidden service
|
|
directories' public identity keys, determines each HSDir's position
|
|
in the hash ring for descriptors made in that period.
|
|
|
|
Each hidden service's descriptors are placed into the ring in
|
|
positions based on the key that was used to sign them. Note that
|
|
hidden service descriptors are not signed with the services' public
|
|
keys directly. Instead, we use a key-blinding system [KEYBLIND] to
|
|
create a new key-of-the-day for each hidden service. Any client that
|
|
knows the hidden service's public identity key can derive these blinded
|
|
signing keys for a given period. It should be impossible to derive
|
|
the blinded signing key lacking that knowledge.
|
|
|
|
This is achieved using two nonces:
|
|
|
|
* A "credential", derived from the public identity key KP_hs_id.
|
|
N_hs_cred.
|
|
|
|
* A "subcredential", derived from the credential N_hs_cred
|
|
and information which various with the current time period.
|
|
N_hs_subcred.
|
|
|
|
The body of each descriptor is also encrypted with a key derived from
|
|
the public signing key.
|
|
|
|
To avoid a "thundering herd" problem where every service generates
|
|
and uploads a new descriptor at the start of each period, each
|
|
descriptor comes online at a time during the period that depends on
|
|
its blinded signing key. The keys for the last period remain valid
|
|
until the new keys come online.
|
|
|
|
1.5. In more detail: Scaling to multiple hosts
|
|
|
|
This design is compatible with our current approaches for scaling hidden
|
|
services. Specifically, hidden service operators can use onionbalance to
|
|
achieve high availability between multiple nodes on the HSDir
|
|
layer. Furthermore, operators can use proposal 255 to load balance their
|
|
hidden services on the introduction layer. See [SCALING-REFS] for further
|
|
discussions on this topic and alternative designs.
|
|
|
|
1.6. In more detail: Backward compatibility with older hidden service
|
|
protocols
|
|
|
|
This design is incompatible with the clients, server, and hsdir node
|
|
protocols from older versions of the hidden service protocol as
|
|
described in rend-spec.txt. On the other hand, it is designed to
|
|
enable the use of older Tor nodes as rendezvous points and
|
|
introduction points.
|
|
|
|
1.7. In more detail: Keeping crypto keys offline
|
|
|
|
In this design, a hidden service's secret identity key may be
|
|
stored offline. It's used only to generate blinded signing keys,
|
|
which are used to sign descriptor signing keys.
|
|
|
|
In order to operate a hidden service, the operator can generate in
|
|
advance a number of blinded signing keys and descriptor signing
|
|
keys (and their credentials; see [DESC-OUTER] and [HS-DESC-ENC]
|
|
below), and their corresponding descriptor encryption keys, and
|
|
export those to the hidden service hosts.
|
|
|
|
As a result, in the scenario where the Hidden Service gets
|
|
compromised, the adversary can only impersonate it for a limited
|
|
period of time (depending on how many signing keys were generated
|
|
in advance).
|
|
|
|
It's important to not send the private part of the blinded signing
|
|
key to the Hidden Service since an attacker can derive from it the
|
|
secret master identity key. The secret blinded signing key should
|
|
only be used to create credentials for the descriptor signing keys.
|
|
|
|
(NOTE: although the protocol allows them, offline keys are not
|
|
implemented as of 0.3.2.1-alpha.)
|
|
|
|
1.8. In more detail: Encryption Keys And Replay Resistance
|
|
|
|
To avoid replays of an introduction request by an introduction point,
|
|
a hidden service host must never accept the same request
|
|
twice. Earlier versions of the hidden service design used an
|
|
authenticated timestamp here, but including a view of the current
|
|
time can create a problematic fingerprint. (See proposal 222 for more
|
|
discussion.)
|
|
|
|
1.9. In more detail: A menagerie of keys
|
|
|
|
[In the text below, an "encryption keypair" is roughly "a keypair you
|
|
can do Diffie-Hellman with" and a "signing keypair" is roughly "a
|
|
keypair you can do ECDSA with."]
|
|
|
|
Public/private keypairs defined in this document:
|
|
|
|
Master (hidden service) identity key -- A master signing keypair
|
|
used as the identity for a hidden service. This key is long
|
|
term and not used on its own to sign anything; it is only used
|
|
to generate blinded signing keys as described in [KEYBLIND]
|
|
and [SUBCRED]. The public key is encoded in the ".onion"
|
|
address according to [NAMING].
|
|
KP_hs_id, KS_hs_id.
|
|
|
|
Blinded signing key -- A keypair derived from the identity key,
|
|
used to sign descriptor signing keys. It changes periodically for
|
|
each service. Clients who know a 'credential' consisting of the
|
|
service's public identity key and an optional secret can derive
|
|
the public blinded identity key for a service. This key is used
|
|
as an index in the DHT-like structure of the directory system
|
|
(see [SUBCRED]).
|
|
KP_blind_id, KS_blind_id.
|
|
|
|
Descriptor signing key -- A key used to sign hidden service
|
|
descriptors. This is signed by blinded signing keys. Unlike
|
|
blinded signing keys and master identity keys, the secret part
|
|
of this key must be stored online by hidden service hosts. The
|
|
public part of this key is included in the unencrypted section
|
|
of HS descriptors (see [DESC-OUTER]).
|
|
KP_hs_desc_sign, KS_hs_desc_sign.
|
|
|
|
Introduction point authentication key -- A short-term signing
|
|
keypair used to identify a hidden service's session at a given
|
|
introduction point. The service makes a fresh keypair is made for each
|
|
introduction point; these are used to sign the request that a
|
|
hidden service host makes when establishing an introduction
|
|
point, so that clients who know the public component of this key
|
|
can get their introduction requests sent to the right
|
|
service. No keypair is ever used with more than one introduction
|
|
point. (previously called a "service key" in rend-spec.txt)
|
|
KP_hs_ipt_sid, KS_hs_ipt_sid
|
|
("hidden service introduction point session id").
|
|
|
|
Introduction point encryption key -- A short-term encryption
|
|
keypair used when establishing connections via an introduction
|
|
point. Plays a role analogous to Tor nodes' onion keys. The service
|
|
makes a fresh keypair is made for each introduction point.
|
|
KP_hss_ntor, KS_hss_ntor.
|
|
|
|
Ephemeral descriptor encryption key -- A short-lived encryption
|
|
keypair made by the service, and used to encrypt the inner layer
|
|
of hidden service descriptors when client authentication is in
|
|
use.
|
|
KP_hss_desc_enc, KS_hss_desc_enc
|
|
|
|
Nonces defined in this document:
|
|
|
|
N_hs_desc_enc -- a nonce used to derive keys to decrypt the inner
|
|
encryption layer of hidden service descriptors. This is
|
|
sometimes also called a "descriptor cookie".
|
|
|
|
Public/private keypairs defined elsewhere:
|
|
|
|
Onion key -- Short-term encryption keypair (KS_ntor, KP_ntor).
|
|
|
|
(Node) identity key (KP_relayid).
|
|
|
|
Symmetric key-like things defined elsewhere:
|
|
|
|
KH from circuit handshake -- An unpredictable value derived as
|
|
part of the Tor circuit extension handshake, used to tie a request
|
|
to a particular circuit.
|
|
|
|
1.9.1. In even more detail: Client authorization keys [CLIENT-AUTH]
|
|
|
|
When client authorization is enabled, each authorized client of a hidden
|
|
service has two more asymmetric keypairs which are shared with the hidden
|
|
service. An entity without those keys is not able to use the hidden
|
|
service. Throughout this document, we assume that these pre-shared keys are
|
|
exchanged between the hidden service and its clients in a secure out-of-band
|
|
fashion.
|
|
|
|
Specifically, each authorized client possesses:
|
|
|
|
- An x25519 keypair used to compute decryption keys that allow the client to
|
|
decrypt the hidden service descriptor. See [HS-DESC-ENC]. This is
|
|
the client's counterpart to KP_hss_desc_enc.
|
|
KP_hsc_desc_enc, KS_hsd_desc_enc.
|
|
|
|
- An ed25519 keypair which allows the client to compute signatures which
|
|
prove to the hidden service that the client is authorized. These
|
|
signatures are inserted into the INTRODUCE1 cell, and without them the
|
|
introduction to the hidden service cannot be completed. See [INTRO-AUTH].
|
|
KP_hsc_intro_auth, KS_hsc_intro_auth.
|
|
|
|
The right way to exchange these keys is to have the client generate keys and
|
|
send the corresponding public keys to the hidden service out-of-band. An
|
|
easier but less secure way of doing this exchange would be to have the
|
|
hidden service generate the keypairs and pass the corresponding private keys
|
|
to its clients. See section [CLIENT-AUTH-MGMT] for more details on how these
|
|
keys should be managed.
|
|
|
|
[TODO: Also specify stealth client authorization.]
|
|
|
|
(NOTE: client authorization is implemented as of 0.3.5.1-alpha.)
|
|
|
|
2. Generating and publishing hidden service descriptors [HSDIR]
|
|
|
|
Hidden service descriptors follow the same metaformat as other Tor
|
|
directory objects. They are published anonymously to Tor servers with the
|
|
HSDir flag, HSDir=2 protocol version and tor version >= 0.3.0.8 (because a
|
|
bug was fixed in this version).
|
|
|
|
2.1. Deriving blinded keys and subcredentials [SUBCRED]
|
|
|
|
In each time period (see [TIME-PERIODS] for a definition of time
|
|
periods), a hidden service host uses a different blinded private key
|
|
to sign its directory information, and clients use a different
|
|
blinded public key as the index for fetching that information.
|
|
|
|
For a candidate for a key derivation method, see Appendix [KEYBLIND].
|
|
|
|
Additionally, clients and hosts derive a subcredential for each
|
|
period. Knowledge of the subcredential is needed to decrypt hidden
|
|
service descriptors for each period and to authenticate with the
|
|
hidden service host in the introduction process. Unlike the
|
|
credential, it changes each period. Knowing the subcredential, even
|
|
in combination with the blinded private key, does not enable the
|
|
hidden service host to derive the main credential--therefore, it is
|
|
safe to put the subcredential on the hidden service host while
|
|
leaving the hidden service's private key offline.
|
|
|
|
The subcredential for a period is derived as:
|
|
|
|
N_hs_subcred = H("subcredential" | N_hs_cred | blinded-public-key).
|
|
|
|
In the above formula, credential corresponds to:
|
|
|
|
N_hs_cred = H("credential" | public-identity-key)
|
|
|
|
where public-identity-key is the public identity master key of the hidden
|
|
service.
|
|
|
|
2.2. Locating, uploading, and downloading hidden service descriptors
|
|
[HASHRING]
|
|
|
|
To avoid attacks where a hidden service's descriptor is easily
|
|
targeted for censorship, we store them at different directories over
|
|
time, and use shared random values to prevent those directories from
|
|
being predictable far in advance.
|
|
|
|
Which Tor servers hosts a hidden service depends on:
|
|
|
|
* the current time period,
|
|
* the daily subcredential,
|
|
* the hidden service directories' public keys,
|
|
* a shared random value that changes in each time period,
|
|
shared_random_value.
|
|
* a set of network-wide networkstatus consensus parameters.
|
|
(Consensus parameters are integer values voted on by authorities
|
|
and published in the consensus documents, described in
|
|
dir-spec.txt, section 3.3.)
|
|
|
|
Below we explain in more detail.
|
|
|
|
2.2.1. Dividing time into periods [TIME-PERIODS]
|
|
|
|
To prevent a single set of hidden service directory from becoming a
|
|
target by adversaries looking to permanently censor a hidden service,
|
|
hidden service descriptors are uploaded to different locations that
|
|
change over time.
|
|
|
|
The length of a "time period" is controlled by the consensus
|
|
parameter 'hsdir-interval', and is a number of minutes between 30 and
|
|
14400 (10 days). The default time period length is 1440 (one day).
|
|
|
|
Time periods start at the Unix epoch (Jan 1, 1970), and are computed by
|
|
taking the number of minutes since the epoch and dividing by the time
|
|
period. However, we want our time periods to start at a regular offset
|
|
from the SRV voting schedule, so we subtract a "rotation time offset"
|
|
of 12 voting periods from the number of minutes since the epoch, before
|
|
dividing by the time period (effectively making "our" epoch start at Jan
|
|
1, 1970 12:00UTC when the voting period is 1 hour.)
|
|
|
|
Example: If the current time is 2016-04-13 11:15:01 UTC, making the seconds
|
|
since the epoch 1460546101, and the number of minutes since the epoch
|
|
24342435. We then subtract the "rotation time offset" of 12*60 minutes from
|
|
the minutes since the epoch, to get 24341715. If the current time period
|
|
length is 1440 minutes, by doing the division we see that we are currently
|
|
in time period number 16903.
|
|
|
|
Specifically, time period #16903 began 16903*1440*60 + (12*60*60) seconds
|
|
after the epoch, at 2016-04-12 12:00 UTC, and ended at 16904*1440*60 +
|
|
(12*60*60) seconds after the epoch, at 2016-04-13 12:00 UTC.
|
|
|
|
2.2.2. When to publish a hidden service descriptor [WHEN-HSDESC]
|
|
|
|
Hidden services periodically publish their descriptor to the responsible
|
|
HSDirs. The set of responsible HSDirs is determined as specified in
|
|
[WHERE-HSDESC].
|
|
|
|
Specifically, every time a hidden service publishes its descriptor, it also
|
|
sets up a timer for a random time between 60 minutes and 120 minutes in the
|
|
future. When the timer triggers, the hidden service needs to publish its
|
|
descriptor again to the responsible HSDirs for that time period.
|
|
[TODO: Control republish period using a consensus parameter?]
|
|
|
|
2.2.2.1. Overlapping descriptors
|
|
|
|
Hidden services need to upload multiple descriptors so that they can be
|
|
reachable to clients with older or newer consensuses than them. Services
|
|
need to upload their descriptors to the HSDirs _before_ the beginning of
|
|
each upcoming time period, so that they are readily available for clients to
|
|
fetch them. Furthermore, services should keep uploading their old descriptor
|
|
even after the end of a time period, so that they can be reachable by
|
|
clients that still have consensuses from the previous time period.
|
|
|
|
Hence, services maintain two active descriptors at every point. Clients on
|
|
the other hand, don't have a notion of overlapping descriptors, and instead
|
|
always download the descriptor for the current time period and shared random
|
|
value. It's the job of the service to ensure that descriptors will be
|
|
available for all clients. See section [FETCHUPLOADDESC] for how this is
|
|
achieved.
|
|
|
|
[TODO: What to do when we run multiple hidden services in a single host?]
|
|
|
|
2.2.3. Where to publish a hidden service descriptor [WHERE-HSDESC]
|
|
|
|
This section specifies how the HSDir hash ring is formed at any given
|
|
time. Whenever a time value is needed (e.g. to get the current time period
|
|
number), we assume that clients and services use the valid-after time from
|
|
their latest live consensus.
|
|
|
|
The following consensus parameters control where a hidden service
|
|
descriptor is stored;
|
|
|
|
hsdir_n_replicas = an integer in range [1,16] with default value 2.
|
|
hsdir_spread_fetch = an integer in range [1,128] with default value 3.
|
|
hsdir_spread_store = an integer in range [1,128] with default value 4.
|
|
(Until 0.3.2.8-rc, the default was 3.)
|
|
|
|
To determine where a given hidden service descriptor will be stored
|
|
in a given period, after the blinded public key for that period is
|
|
derived, the uploading or downloading party calculates:
|
|
|
|
for replicanum in 1...hsdir_n_replicas:
|
|
hs_index(replicanum) = H("store-at-idx" |
|
|
blinded_public_key |
|
|
INT_8(replicanum) |
|
|
INT_8(period_length) |
|
|
INT_8(period_num) )
|
|
|
|
where blinded_public_key is specified in section [KEYBLIND], period_length
|
|
is the length of the time period in minutes, and period_num is calculated
|
|
using the current consensus "valid-after" as specified in section
|
|
[TIME-PERIODS].
|
|
|
|
Then, for each node listed in the current consensus with the HSDir flag,
|
|
we compute a directory index for that node as:
|
|
|
|
hsdir_index(node) = H("node-idx" | node_identity |
|
|
shared_random_value |
|
|
INT_8(period_num) |
|
|
INT_8(period_length) )
|
|
|
|
where shared_random_value is the shared value generated by the authorities
|
|
in section [PUB-SHAREDRANDOM], and node_identity is the ed25519 identity
|
|
key of the node.
|
|
|
|
Finally, for replicanum in 1...hsdir_n_replicas, the hidden service
|
|
host uploads descriptors to the first hsdir_spread_store nodes whose
|
|
indices immediately follow hs_index(replicanum). If any of those
|
|
nodes have already been selected for a lower-numbered replica of the
|
|
service, any nodes already chosen are disregarded (i.e. skipped over)
|
|
when choosing a replica's hsdir_spread_store nodes.
|
|
|
|
When choosing an HSDir to download from, clients choose randomly from
|
|
among the first hsdir_spread_fetch nodes after the indices. (Note
|
|
that, in order to make the system better tolerate disappearing
|
|
HSDirs, hsdir_spread_fetch may be less than hsdir_spread_store.)
|
|
Again, nodes from lower-numbered replicas are disregarded when
|
|
choosing the spread for a replica.
|
|
|
|
2.2.4. Using time periods and SRVs to fetch/upload HS descriptors [FETCHUPLOADDESC]
|
|
|
|
Hidden services and clients need to make correct use of time periods (TP)
|
|
and shared random values (SRVs) to successfully fetch and upload
|
|
descriptors. Furthermore, to avoid problems with skewed clocks, both clients
|
|
and services use the 'valid-after' time of a live consensus as a way to take
|
|
decisions with regards to uploading and fetching descriptors. By using the
|
|
consensus times as the ground truth here, we minimize the desynchronization
|
|
of clients and services due to system clock. Whenever time-based decisions
|
|
are taken in this section, assume that they are consensus times and not
|
|
system times.
|
|
|
|
As [PUB-SHAREDRANDOM] specifies, consensuses contain two shared random
|
|
values (the current one and the previous one). Hidden services and clients
|
|
are asked to match these shared random values with descriptor time periods
|
|
and use the right SRV when fetching/uploading descriptors. This section
|
|
attempts to precisely specify how this works.
|
|
|
|
Let's start with an illustration of the system:
|
|
|
|
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
| |
|
|
| 00:00 12:00 00:00 12:00 00:00 12:00 |
|
|
| SRV#1 TP#1 SRV#2 TP#2 SRV#3 TP#3 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| $==========|-----------$===========|-----------$===========| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
|
|
Legend: [TP#1 = Time Period #1]
|
|
[SRV#1 = Shared Random Value #1]
|
|
["$" = descriptor rotation moment]
|
|
|
|
2.2.4.1. Client behavior for fetching descriptors [CLIENTFETCH]
|
|
|
|
And here is how clients use TPs and SRVs to fetch descriptors:
|
|
|
|
Clients always aim to synchronize their TP with SRV, so they always want to
|
|
use TP#N with SRV#N: To achieve this wrt time periods, clients always use
|
|
the current time period when fetching descriptors. Now wrt SRVs, if a client
|
|
is in the time segment between a new time period and a new SRV (i.e. the
|
|
segments drawn with "-") it uses the current SRV, else if the client is in a
|
|
time segment between a new SRV and a new time period (i.e. the segments
|
|
drawn with "="), it uses the previous SRV.
|
|
|
|
Example:
|
|
|
|
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
| |
|
|
| 00:00 12:00 00:00 12:00 00:00 12:00 |
|
|
| SRV#1 TP#1 SRV#2 TP#2 SRV#3 TP#3 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| $==========|-----------$===========|-----------$===========| |
|
|
| ^ ^ |
|
|
| C1 C2 |
|
|
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
|
|
If a client (C1) is at 13:00 right after TP#1, then it will use TP#1 and
|
|
SRV#1 for fetching descriptors. Also, if a client (C2) is at 01:00 right
|
|
after SRV#2, it will still use TP#1 and SRV#1.
|
|
|
|
2.2.4.2. Service behavior for uploading descriptors [SERVICEUPLOAD]
|
|
|
|
As discussed above, services maintain two active descriptors at any time. We
|
|
call these the "first" and "second" service descriptors. Services rotate
|
|
their descriptor every time they receive a consensus with a valid_after time
|
|
past the next SRV calculation time. They rotate their descriptors by
|
|
discarding their first descriptor, pushing the second descriptor to the
|
|
first, and rebuilding their second descriptor with the latest data.
|
|
|
|
Services like clients also employ a different logic for picking SRV and TP
|
|
values based on their position in the graph above. Here is the logic:
|
|
|
|
2.2.4.2.1. First descriptor upload logic [FIRSTDESCUPLOAD]
|
|
|
|
Here is the service logic for uploading its first descriptor:
|
|
|
|
When a service is in the time segment between a new time period a new SRV
|
|
(i.e. the segments drawn with "-"), it uses the previous time period and
|
|
previous SRV for uploading its first descriptor: that's meant to cover
|
|
for clients that have a consensus that is still in the previous time period.
|
|
|
|
Example: Consider in the above illustration that the service is at 13:00
|
|
right after TP#1. It will upload its first descriptor using TP#0 and SRV#0.
|
|
So if a client still has a 11:00 consensus it will be able to access it
|
|
based on the client logic above.
|
|
|
|
Now if a service is in the time segment between a new SRV and a new time
|
|
period (i.e. the segments drawn with "=") it uses the current time period
|
|
and the previous SRV for its first descriptor: that's meant to cover clients
|
|
with an up-to-date consensus in the same time period as the service.
|
|
|
|
Example:
|
|
|
|
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
| |
|
|
| 00:00 12:00 00:00 12:00 00:00 12:00 |
|
|
| SRV#1 TP#1 SRV#2 TP#2 SRV#3 TP#3 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| $==========|-----------$===========|-----------$===========| |
|
|
| ^ |
|
|
| S |
|
|
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
|
|
Consider that the service is at 01:00 right after SRV#2: it will upload its
|
|
first descriptor using TP#1 and SRV#1.
|
|
|
|
2.2.4.2.2. Second descriptor upload logic [SECONDDESCUPLOAD]
|
|
|
|
Here is the service logic for uploading its second descriptor:
|
|
|
|
When a service is in the time segment between a new time period a new SRV
|
|
(i.e. the segments drawn with "-"), it uses the current time period and
|
|
current SRV for uploading its second descriptor: that's meant to cover for
|
|
clients that have an up-to-date consensus on the same TP as the service.
|
|
|
|
Example: Consider in the above illustration that the service is at 13:00
|
|
right after TP#1: it will upload its second descriptor using TP#1 and SRV#1.
|
|
|
|
Now if a service is in the time segment between a new SRV and a new time
|
|
period (i.e. the segments drawn with "=") it uses the next time period and
|
|
the current SRV for its second descriptor: that's meant to cover clients
|
|
with a newer consensus than the service (in the next time period).
|
|
|
|
Example:
|
|
|
|
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
| |
|
|
| 00:00 12:00 00:00 12:00 00:00 12:00 |
|
|
| SRV#1 TP#1 SRV#2 TP#2 SRV#3 TP#3 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| $==========|-----------$===========|-----------$===========| |
|
|
| ^ |
|
|
| S |
|
|
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
|
|
Consider that the service is at 01:00 right after SRV#2: it will upload its
|
|
second descriptor using TP#2 and SRV#2.
|
|
|
|
2.2.5. Expiring hidden service descriptors [EXPIRE-DESC]
|
|
|
|
Hidden services set their descriptor's "descriptor-lifetime" field to 180
|
|
minutes (3 hours). Hidden services ensure that their descriptor will remain
|
|
valid in the HSDir caches, by republishing their descriptors periodically as
|
|
specified in [WHEN-HSDESC].
|
|
|
|
Hidden services MUST also keep their introduction circuits alive for as long
|
|
as descriptors including those intro points are valid (even if that's after
|
|
the time period has changed).
|
|
|
|
2.2.6. URLs for anonymous uploading and downloading
|
|
|
|
Hidden service descriptors conforming to this specification are uploaded
|
|
with an HTTP POST request to the URL /tor/hs/<version>/publish relative to
|
|
the hidden service directory's root, and downloaded with an HTTP GET
|
|
request for the URL /tor/hs/<version>/<z> where <z> is a base64 encoding of
|
|
the hidden service's blinded public key and <version> is the protocol
|
|
version which is "3" in this case.
|
|
|
|
These requests must be made anonymously, on circuits not used for
|
|
anything else.
|
|
|
|
2.2.7. Client-side validation of onion addresses
|
|
|
|
When a Tor client receives a prop224 onion address from the user, it
|
|
MUST first validate the onion address before attempting to connect or
|
|
fetch its descriptor. If the validation fails, the client MUST
|
|
refuse to connect.
|
|
|
|
As part of the address validation, Tor clients should check that the
|
|
underlying ed25519 key does not have a torsion component. If Tor accepted
|
|
ed25519 keys with torsion components, attackers could create multiple
|
|
equivalent onion addresses for a single ed25519 key, which would map to the
|
|
same service. We want to avoid that because it could lead to phishing
|
|
attacks and surprising behaviors (e.g. imagine a browser plugin that blocks
|
|
onion addresses, but could be bypassed using an equivalent onion address
|
|
with a torsion component).
|
|
|
|
The right way for clients to detect such fraudulent addresses (which should
|
|
only occur malevolently and never naturally) is to extract the ed25519
|
|
public key from the onion address and multiply it by the ed25519 group order
|
|
and ensure that the result is the ed25519 identity element. For more
|
|
details, please see [TORSION-REFS].
|
|
|
|
2.3. Publishing shared random values [PUB-SHAREDRANDOM]
|
|
|
|
Our design for limiting the predictability of HSDir upload locations
|
|
relies on a shared random value (SRV) that isn't predictable in advance or
|
|
too influenceable by an attacker. The authorities must run a protocol
|
|
to generate such a value at least once per hsdir period. Here we
|
|
describe how they publish these values; the procedure they use to
|
|
generate them can change independently of the rest of this
|
|
specification. For more information see [SHAREDRANDOM-REFS].
|
|
|
|
According to proposal 250, we add two new lines in consensuses:
|
|
|
|
"shared-rand-previous-value" SP NUM_REVEALS SP VALUE NL
|
|
"shared-rand-current-value" SP NUM_REVEALS SP VALUE NL
|
|
|
|
2.3.1. Client behavior in the absence of shared random values
|
|
|
|
If the previous or current shared random value cannot be found in a
|
|
consensus, then Tor clients and services need to generate their own random
|
|
value for use when choosing HSDirs.
|
|
|
|
To do so, Tor clients and services use:
|
|
|
|
SRV = H("shared-random-disaster" | INT_8(period_length) | INT_8(period_num))
|
|
|
|
where period_length is the length of a time period in minutes, period_num is
|
|
calculated as specified in [TIME-PERIODS] for the wanted shared random value
|
|
that could not be found originally.
|
|
|
|
2.3.2. Hidden services and changing shared random values
|
|
|
|
It's theoretically possible that the consensus shared random values will
|
|
change or disappear in the middle of a time period because of directory
|
|
authorities dropping offline or misbehaving.
|
|
|
|
To avoid client reachability issues in this rare event, hidden services
|
|
should use the new shared random values to find the new responsible HSDirs
|
|
and upload their descriptors there.
|
|
|
|
XXX How long should they upload descriptors there for?
|
|
|
|
2.4. Hidden service descriptors: outer wrapper [DESC-OUTER]
|
|
|
|
The format for a hidden service descriptor is as follows, using the
|
|
meta-format from dir-spec.txt.
|
|
|
|
"hs-descriptor" SP version-number NL
|
|
|
|
[At start, exactly once.]
|
|
|
|
The version-number is a 32 bit unsigned integer indicating the version
|
|
of the descriptor. Current version is "3".
|
|
|
|
"descriptor-lifetime" SP LifetimeMinutes NL
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once]
|
|
|
|
The lifetime of a descriptor in minutes. An HSDir SHOULD expire the
|
|
hidden service descriptor at least LifetimeMinutes after it was
|
|
uploaded.
|
|
|
|
The LifetimeMinutes field can take values between 30 and 720 (12
|
|
hours).
|
|
|
|
"descriptor-signing-key-cert" NL certificate NL
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once.]
|
|
|
|
The 'certificate' field contains a certificate in the format from
|
|
proposal 220, wrapped with "-----BEGIN ED25519 CERT-----". The
|
|
certificate cross-certifies the short-term descriptor signing key with
|
|
the blinded public key. The certificate type must be [08], and the
|
|
blinded public key must be present as the signing-key extension.
|
|
|
|
"revision-counter" SP Integer NL
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once.]
|
|
|
|
The revision number of the descriptor. If an HSDir receives a
|
|
second descriptor for a key that it already has a descriptor for,
|
|
it should retain and serve the descriptor with the higher
|
|
revision-counter.
|
|
|
|
(Checking for monotonically increasing revision-counter values
|
|
prevents an attacker from replacing a newer descriptor signed by
|
|
a given key with a copy of an older version.)
|
|
|
|
Implementations MUST be able to parse 64-bit values for these
|
|
counters.
|
|
|
|
"superencrypted" NL encrypted-string
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once.]
|
|
|
|
An encrypted blob, whose format is discussed in [HS-DESC-ENC] below. The
|
|
blob is base64 encoded and enclosed in -----BEGIN MESSAGE---- and
|
|
----END MESSAGE---- wrappers. (The resulting document does not end with
|
|
a newline character.)
|
|
|
|
"signature" SP signature NL
|
|
|
|
[exactly once, at end.]
|
|
|
|
A signature of all previous fields, using the signing key in the
|
|
descriptor-signing-key-cert line, prefixed by the string "Tor onion
|
|
service descriptor sig v3". We use a separate key for signing, so that
|
|
the hidden service host does not need to have its private blinded key
|
|
online.
|
|
|
|
HSDirs accept hidden service descriptors of up to 50k bytes (a consensus
|
|
parameter should also be introduced to control this value).
|
|
|
|
2.5. Hidden service descriptors: encryption format [HS-DESC-ENC]
|
|
|
|
Hidden service descriptors are protected by two layers of encryption.
|
|
Clients need to decrypt both layers to connect to the hidden service.
|
|
|
|
The first layer of encryption provides confidentiality against entities who
|
|
don't know the public key of the hidden service (e.g. HSDirs), while the
|
|
second layer of encryption is only useful when client authorization is enabled
|
|
and protects against entities that do not possess valid client credentials.
|
|
|
|
2.5.1. First layer of encryption [HS-DESC-FIRST-LAYER]
|
|
|
|
The first layer of HS descriptor encryption is designed to protect
|
|
descriptor confidentiality against entities who don't know the public
|
|
identity key of the hidden service.
|
|
|
|
2.5.1.1. First layer encryption logic
|
|
|
|
The encryption keys and format for the first layer of encryption are
|
|
generated as specified in [HS-DESC-ENCRYPTION-KEYS] with customization
|
|
parameters:
|
|
|
|
SECRET_DATA = blinded-public-key
|
|
STRING_CONSTANT = "hsdir-superencrypted-data"
|
|
|
|
The encryption scheme in [HS-DESC-ENCRYPTION-KEYS] uses the service
|
|
credential which is derived from the public identity key (see [SUBCRED]) to
|
|
ensure that only entities who know the public identity key can decrypt the
|
|
first descriptor layer.
|
|
|
|
The ciphertext is placed on the "superencrypted" field of the descriptor.
|
|
|
|
Before encryption the plaintext is padded with NUL bytes to the nearest
|
|
multiple of 10k bytes.
|
|
|
|
2.5.1.2. First layer plaintext format
|
|
|
|
After clients decrypt the first layer of encryption, they need to parse the
|
|
plaintext to get to the second layer ciphertext which is contained in the
|
|
"encrypted" field.
|
|
|
|
If client auth is enabled, the hidden service generates a fresh
|
|
descriptor_cookie key (`N_hs_desc_enc`, 32 random bytes) and encrypts
|
|
it using each authorized client's identity x25519 key. Authorized
|
|
clients can use the descriptor cookie (`N_hs_desc_enc`) to decrypt
|
|
the second (inner) layer of encryption. Our encryption scheme
|
|
requires the hidden service to also generate an ephemeral x25519
|
|
keypair for each new descriptor.
|
|
|
|
If client auth is disabled, fake data is placed in each of the fields below
|
|
to obfuscate whether client authorization is enabled.
|
|
|
|
Here are all the supported fields:
|
|
|
|
"desc-auth-type" SP type NL
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once]
|
|
|
|
This field contains the type of authorization used to protect the
|
|
descriptor. The only recognized type is "x25519" and specifies the
|
|
encryption scheme described in this section.
|
|
|
|
If client authorization is disabled, the value here should be "x25519".
|
|
|
|
"desc-auth-ephemeral-key" SP key NL
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once]
|
|
|
|
This field contains `KP_hss_desc_enc`, an ephemeral x25519 public
|
|
key generated by the hidden service and encoded in base64. The key
|
|
is used by the encryption scheme below.
|
|
|
|
If client authorization is disabled, the value here should be a fresh
|
|
x25519 pubkey that will remain unused.
|
|
|
|
"auth-client" SP client-id SP iv SP encrypted-cookie
|
|
|
|
[At least once]
|
|
|
|
When client authorization is enabled, the hidden service inserts an
|
|
"auth-client" line for each of its authorized clients. If client
|
|
authorization is disabled, the fields here can be populated with random
|
|
data of the right size (that's 8 bytes for 'client-id', 16 bytes for 'iv'
|
|
and 16 bytes for 'encrypted-cookie' all encoded with base64).
|
|
|
|
When client authorization is enabled, each "auth-client" line
|
|
contains the descriptor cookie `N_hs_desc_enc` encrypted to each
|
|
individual client. We assume that each authorized client possesses
|
|
a pre-shared x25519 keypair (`KP_hsc_desc_enc`) which is used to
|
|
decrypt the descriptor cookie.
|
|
|
|
We now describe the descriptor cookie encryption scheme. Here are the
|
|
relevant keys:
|
|
|
|
# KS/KP_hsc_desc_enc
|
|
client_x = private x25519 key of authorized client
|
|
client_X = public x25519 key of authorized client
|
|
# KS/KP_hss_desc_enc
|
|
hs_y = private key of ephemeral x25519 keypair of hidden service
|
|
hs_Y = public key of ephemeral x25519 keypair of hidden service
|
|
# N_hs_desc_enc
|
|
descriptor_cookie = descriptor cookie used to encrypt the descriptor
|
|
|
|
And here is what the hidden service computes:
|
|
|
|
SECRET_SEED = x25519(hs_y, client_X)
|
|
KEYS = KDF(N_hs_subcred | SECRET_SEED, 40)
|
|
CLIENT-ID = fist 8 bytes of KEYS
|
|
COOKIE-KEY = last 32 bytes of KEYS
|
|
|
|
Here is a description of the fields in the "auth-client" line:
|
|
|
|
- The "client-id" field is CLIENT-ID from above encoded in base64.
|
|
|
|
- The "iv" field is 16 random bytes encoded in base64.
|
|
|
|
- The "encrypted-cookie" field contains the descriptor cookie ciphertext
|
|
as follows and is encoded in base64:
|
|
encrypted-cookie = STREAM(iv, COOKIE-KEY) XOR descriptor_cookie
|
|
|
|
See section [FIRST-LAYER-CLIENT-BEHAVIOR] for the client-side logic of
|
|
how to decrypt the descriptor cookie.
|
|
|
|
"encrypted" NL encrypted-string
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once]
|
|
|
|
An encrypted blob containing the second layer ciphertext, whose format is
|
|
discussed in [HS-DESC-SECOND-LAYER] below. The blob is base64 encoded
|
|
and enclosed in -----BEGIN MESSAGE---- and ----END MESSAGE---- wrappers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compatibility note: The C Tor implementation does not include a final
|
|
newline when generating this first-layer-plaintext section; other
|
|
implementations MUST accept this section even if it is missing its final
|
|
newline. Other implementations MAY generate this section without a final
|
|
newline themselves, to avoid being distinguishable from C tor.
|
|
|
|
2.5.1.3. Client behavior [FIRST-LAYER-CLIENT-BEHAVIOR]
|
|
|
|
The goal of clients at this stage is to decrypt the "encrypted" field as
|
|
described in [HS-DESC-SECOND-LAYER].
|
|
|
|
If client authorization is enabled, authorized clients need to extract the
|
|
descriptor cookie to proceed with decryption of the second layer as
|
|
follows:
|
|
|
|
An authorized client parsing the first layer of an encrypted descriptor,
|
|
extracts the ephemeral key from "desc-auth-ephemeral-key" and calculates
|
|
CLIENT-ID and COOKIE-KEY as described in the section above using their
|
|
x25519 private key. The client then uses CLIENT-ID to find the right
|
|
"auth-client" field which contains the ciphertext of the descriptor
|
|
cookie. The client then uses COOKIE-KEY and the iv to decrypt the
|
|
descriptor_cookie, which is used to decrypt the second layer of descriptor
|
|
encryption as described in [HS-DESC-SECOND-LAYER].
|
|
|
|
2.5.1.4. Hiding client authorization data
|
|
|
|
Hidden services should avoid leaking whether client authorization is
|
|
enabled or how many authorized clients there are.
|
|
|
|
Hence even when client authorization is disabled, the hidden service adds
|
|
fake "desc-auth-type", "desc-auth-ephemeral-key" and "auth-client" lines to
|
|
the descriptor, as described in [HS-DESC-FIRST-LAYER].
|
|
|
|
The hidden service also avoids leaking the number of authorized clients by
|
|
adding fake "auth-client" entries to its descriptor. Specifically,
|
|
descriptors always contain a number of authorized clients that is a
|
|
multiple of 16 by adding fake "auth-client" entries if needed.
|
|
[XXX consider randomization of the value 16]
|
|
|
|
Clients MUST accept descriptors with any number of "auth-client" lines as
|
|
long as the total descriptor size is within the max limit of 50k (also
|
|
controlled with a consensus parameter).
|
|
|
|
2.5.2. Second layer of encryption [HS-DESC-SECOND-LAYER]
|
|
|
|
The second layer of descriptor encryption is designed to protect descriptor
|
|
confidentiality against unauthorized clients. If client authorization is
|
|
enabled, it's encrypted using the descriptor_cookie, and contains needed
|
|
information for connecting to the hidden service, like the list of its
|
|
introduction points.
|
|
|
|
If client authorization is disabled, then the second layer of HS encryption
|
|
does not offer any additional security, but is still used.
|
|
|
|
2.5.2.1. Second layer encryption keys
|
|
|
|
The encryption keys and format for the second layer of encryption are
|
|
generated as specified in [HS-DESC-ENCRYPTION-KEYS] with customization
|
|
parameters as follows:
|
|
|
|
SECRET_DATA = blinded-public-key | descriptor_cookie
|
|
STRING_CONSTANT = "hsdir-encrypted-data"
|
|
|
|
If client authorization is disabled the 'descriptor_cookie' field is left blank.
|
|
|
|
The ciphertext is placed on the "encrypted" field of the descriptor.
|
|
|
|
2.5.2.2. Second layer plaintext format
|
|
|
|
After decrypting the second layer ciphertext, clients can finally learn the
|
|
list of intro points etc. The plaintext has the following format:
|
|
|
|
"create2-formats" SP formats NL
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once]
|
|
|
|
A space-separated list of integers denoting CREATE2 cell format numbers
|
|
that the server recognizes. Must include at least ntor as described in
|
|
tor-spec.txt. See tor-spec section 5.1 for a list of recognized
|
|
handshake types.
|
|
|
|
"intro-auth-required" SP types NL
|
|
|
|
[At most once]
|
|
|
|
A space-separated list of introduction-layer authentication types; see
|
|
section [INTRO-AUTH] for more info. A client that does not support at
|
|
least one of these authentication types will not be able to contact the
|
|
host. Recognized types are: 'password' and 'ed25519'.
|
|
|
|
"single-onion-service"
|
|
|
|
[None or at most once]
|
|
|
|
If present, this line indicates that the service is a Single Onion
|
|
Service (see prop260 for more details about that type of service). This
|
|
field has been introduced in 0.3.0 meaning 0.2.9 service don't include
|
|
this.
|
|
|
|
Followed by zero or more introduction points as follows (see section
|
|
[NUM_INTRO_POINT] below for accepted values):
|
|
|
|
"introduction-point" SP link-specifiers NL
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once per introduction point at start of introduction
|
|
point section]
|
|
|
|
The link-specifiers is a base64 encoding of a link specifier
|
|
block in the format described in BUILDING-BLOCKS.
|
|
|
|
As of 0.4.1.1-alpha, services include both IPv4 and IPv6 link
|
|
specifiers in descriptors. All available addresses SHOULD be
|
|
included in the descriptor, regardless of the address that the
|
|
onion service actually used to connect/extend to the intro
|
|
point.
|
|
|
|
The client SHOULD NOT reject any LSTYPE fields which it doesn't
|
|
recognize; instead, it should use them verbatim in its EXTEND
|
|
request to the introduction point.
|
|
|
|
The client MAY perform basic validity checks on the link
|
|
specifiers in the descriptor. These checks SHOULD NOT leak
|
|
detailed information about the client's version, configuration,
|
|
or consensus. (See 3.3 for service link specifier handling.)
|
|
|
|
"onion-key" SP "ntor" SP key NL
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once per introduction point]
|
|
|
|
The key is a base64 encoded curve25519 public key which is the onion
|
|
key of the introduction point Tor node used for the ntor handshake
|
|
when a client extends to it.
|
|
|
|
"onion-key" SP KeyType SP key.. NL
|
|
|
|
[Any number of times]
|
|
|
|
Implementations should accept other types of onion keys using this
|
|
syntax (where "KeyType" is some string other than "ntor");
|
|
unrecognized key types should be ignored.
|
|
|
|
"auth-key" NL certificate NL
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once per introduction point]
|
|
|
|
The certificate is a proposal 220 certificate wrapped in
|
|
"-----BEGIN ED25519 CERT-----". It contains the introduction
|
|
point authentication key (`KP_hs_ipt_sid`), signed by
|
|
the descriptor signing key (`KP_hs_desc_sign`). The
|
|
certificate type must be [09], and the signing key extension
|
|
is mandatory.
|
|
|
|
NOTE: This certificate was originally intended to be
|
|
constructed the other way around: the signing and signed keys
|
|
are meant to be reversed. However, C tor implemented it
|
|
backwards, and other implementations now need to do the same
|
|
in order to conform. (Since this section is inside the
|
|
descriptor, which is _already_ signed by `KP_hs_desc_sign`,
|
|
the verification aspect of this certificate serves no point in
|
|
its current form.)
|
|
|
|
"enc-key" SP "ntor" SP key NL
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once per introduction point]
|
|
|
|
The key is a base64 encoded curve25519 public key used to encrypt
|
|
the introduction request to service. (`KP_hss_ntor`)
|
|
|
|
"enc-key" SP KeyType SP key.. NL
|
|
|
|
[Any number of times]
|
|
|
|
Implementations should accept other types of onion keys using this
|
|
syntax (where "KeyType" is some string other than "ntor");
|
|
unrecognized key types should be ignored.
|
|
|
|
"enc-key-cert" NL certificate NL
|
|
|
|
[Exactly once per introduction point]
|
|
|
|
Cross-certification of the encryption key using the descriptor
|
|
signing key.
|
|
|
|
For "ntor" keys, certificate is a proposal 220 certificate
|
|
wrapped in "-----BEGIN ED25519 CERT-----" armor. The subject
|
|
key is the the ed25519 equivalent of a curve25519 public
|
|
encryption key (`KP_hss_ntor`), with the ed25519 key
|
|
derived using the process in proposal 228 appendix A. The
|
|
signing key is the descriptor signing key (`KP_hs_desc_sign`).
|
|
The certificate type must be [0B], and the signing-key
|
|
extension is mandatory.
|
|
|
|
NOTE: As with "auth-key", this certificate was intended to be
|
|
constructed the other way around. However, for compatibility
|
|
with C tor, implementations need to construct it this way. It
|
|
serves even less point than "auth-key", however, since the
|
|
encryption key `KP_hss_ntor` is already available from
|
|
the `enc-key` entry.
|
|
|
|
"legacy-key" NL key NL
|
|
|
|
[None or at most once per introduction point]
|
|
[This field is obsolete and should never be generated; it
|
|
is included for historical reasons only.]
|
|
|
|
The key is an ASN.1 encoded RSA public key in PEM format used for a
|
|
legacy introduction point as described in [LEGACY_EST_INTRO].
|
|
|
|
This field is only present if the introduction point only supports
|
|
legacy protocol (v2) that is <= 0.2.9 or the protocol version value
|
|
"HSIntro 3".
|
|
|
|
"legacy-key-cert" NL certificate NL
|
|
|
|
[None or at most once per introduction point]
|
|
[This field is obsolete and should never be generated; it
|
|
is included for historical reasons only.]
|
|
|
|
MUST be present if "legacy-key" is present.
|
|
|
|
The certificate is a proposal 220 RSA->Ed cross-certificate wrapped
|
|
in "-----BEGIN CROSSCERT-----" armor, cross-certifying the RSA
|
|
public key found in "legacy-key" using the descriptor signing key.
|
|
|
|
To remain compatible with future revisions to the descriptor format,
|
|
clients should ignore unrecognized lines in the descriptor.
|
|
Other encryption and authentication key formats are allowed; clients
|
|
should ignore ones they do not recognize.
|
|
|
|
Clients who manage to extract the introduction points of the hidden service
|
|
can proceed with the introduction protocol as specified in [INTRO-PROTOCOL].
|
|
|
|
2.5.3. Deriving hidden service descriptor encryption keys [HS-DESC-ENCRYPTION-KEYS]
|
|
|
|
In this section we present the generic encryption format for hidden service
|
|
descriptors. We use the same encryption format in both encryption layers,
|
|
hence we introduce two customization parameters SECRET_DATA and
|
|
STRING_CONSTANT which vary between the layers.
|
|
|
|
The SECRET_DATA parameter specifies the secret data that are used during
|
|
encryption key generation, while STRING_CONSTANT is merely a string constant
|
|
that is used as part of the KDF.
|
|
|
|
Here is the key generation logic:
|
|
|
|
SALT = 16 bytes from H(random), changes each time we rebuild the
|
|
descriptor even if the content of the descriptor hasn't changed.
|
|
(So that we don't leak whether the intro point list etc. changed)
|
|
|
|
secret_input = SECRET_DATA | N_hs_subcred | INT_8(revision_counter)
|
|
|
|
keys = KDF(secret_input | salt | STRING_CONSTANT, S_KEY_LEN + S_IV_LEN + MAC_KEY_LEN)
|
|
|
|
SECRET_KEY = first S_KEY_LEN bytes of keys
|
|
SECRET_IV = next S_IV_LEN bytes of keys
|
|
MAC_KEY = last MAC_KEY_LEN bytes of keys
|
|
|
|
The encrypted data has the format:
|
|
|
|
SALT hashed random bytes from above [16 bytes]
|
|
ENCRYPTED The ciphertext [variable]
|
|
MAC D_MAC of both above fields [32 bytes]
|
|
|
|
The final encryption format is ENCRYPTED = STREAM(SECRET_IV,SECRET_KEY) XOR Plaintext .
|
|
|
|
Where D_MAC = H(mac_key_len | MAC_KEY | salt_len | SALT | ENCRYPTED)
|
|
and
|
|
mac_key_len = htonll(len(MAC_KEY))
|
|
and
|
|
salt_len = htonll(len(SALT)).
|
|
|
|
2.5.4. Number of introduction points [NUM_INTRO_POINT]
|
|
|
|
This section defines how many introduction points an hidden service
|
|
descriptor can have at minimum, by default and the maximum:
|
|
|
|
Minimum: 0 - Default: 3 - Maximum: 20
|
|
|
|
A value of 0 would means that the service is still alive but doesn't want
|
|
to be reached by any client at the moment. Note that the descriptor size
|
|
increases considerably as more introduction points are added.
|
|
|
|
The reason for a maximum value of 20 is to give enough scalability to tools
|
|
like OnionBalance to be able to load balance up to 120 servers (20 x 6
|
|
HSDirs) but also in order for the descriptor size to not overwhelmed hidden
|
|
service directories with user defined values that could be gigantic.
|
|
|
|
3. The introduction protocol [INTRO-PROTOCOL]
|
|
|
|
The introduction protocol proceeds in three steps.
|
|
|
|
First, a hidden service host builds an anonymous circuit to a Tor
|
|
node and registers that circuit as an introduction point.
|
|
|
|
Single Onion Services attempt to build a non-anonymous single-hop circuit,
|
|
but use an anonymous 3-hop circuit if:
|
|
|
|
* the intro point is on an address that is configured as unreachable via
|
|
a direct connection, or
|
|
* the initial attempt to connect to the intro point over a single-hop
|
|
circuit fails, and they are retrying the intro point connection.
|
|
|
|
[After 'First' and before 'Second', the hidden service publishes its
|
|
introduction points and associated keys, and the client fetches
|
|
them as described in section [HSDIR] above.]
|
|
|
|
Second, a client builds an anonymous circuit to the introduction
|
|
point, and sends an introduction request.
|
|
|
|
Third, the introduction point relays the introduction request along
|
|
the introduction circuit to the hidden service host, and acknowledges
|
|
the introduction request to the client.
|
|
|
|
3.1. Registering an introduction point [REG_INTRO_POINT]
|
|
|
|
3.1.1. Extensible ESTABLISH_INTRO protocol. [EST_INTRO]
|
|
|
|
When a hidden service is establishing a new introduction point, it
|
|
sends an ESTABLISH_INTRO cell with the following contents:
|
|
|
|
AUTH_KEY_TYPE [1 byte]
|
|
AUTH_KEY_LEN [2 bytes]
|
|
AUTH_KEY [AUTH_KEY_LEN bytes]
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS [1 byte]
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS times:
|
|
EXT_FIELD_TYPE [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD_LEN [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD [EXT_FIELD_LEN bytes]
|
|
HANDSHAKE_AUTH [MAC_LEN bytes]
|
|
SIG_LEN [2 bytes]
|
|
SIG [SIG_LEN bytes]
|
|
|
|
The AUTH_KEY_TYPE field indicates the type of the introduction point
|
|
authentication key and the type of the MAC to use in
|
|
HANDSHAKE_AUTH. Recognized types are:
|
|
|
|
[00, 01] -- Reserved for legacy introduction cells; see
|
|
[LEGACY_EST_INTRO below]
|
|
[02] -- Ed25519; SHA3-256.
|
|
|
|
The AUTH_KEY_LEN field determines the length of the AUTH_KEY
|
|
field. The AUTH_KEY field contains the public introduction point
|
|
authentication key.
|
|
|
|
The EXT_FIELD_TYPE, EXT_FIELD_LEN, EXT_FIELD entries are reserved for
|
|
extensions to the introduction protocol. Extensions with
|
|
unrecognized EXT_FIELD_TYPE values must be ignored.
|
|
(`EXT_FIELD_LEN` may be zero, in which case EXT_FIELD is absent.)
|
|
|
|
Unless otherwise specified in the documentation for an extension type:
|
|
* Each extension type SHOULD be sent only once in a message.
|
|
* Parties MUST ignore any occurrences all occurrences of an extension
|
|
with a given type after the first such occurrence.
|
|
* Extensions SHOULD be sent in numerically ascending order by type.
|
|
(The above extension sorting and multiplicity rules are only defaults;
|
|
they may be overridden in the descriptions of individual extensions.)
|
|
|
|
The HANDSHAKE_AUTH field contains the MAC of all earlier fields in
|
|
the cell using as its key the shared per-circuit material ("KH")
|
|
generated during the circuit extension protocol; see tor-spec.txt
|
|
section 5.2, "Setting circuit keys". It prevents replays of
|
|
ESTABLISH_INTRO cells.
|
|
|
|
SIG_LEN is the length of the signature.
|
|
|
|
SIG is a signature, using AUTH_KEY, of all contents of the cell, up
|
|
to but not including SIG. These contents are prefixed with the string
|
|
"Tor establish-intro cell v1".
|
|
|
|
Upon receiving an ESTABLISH_INTRO cell, a Tor node first decodes the
|
|
key and the signature, and checks the signature. The node must reject
|
|
the ESTABLISH_INTRO cell and destroy the circuit in these cases:
|
|
|
|
* If the key type is unrecognized
|
|
* If the key is ill-formatted
|
|
* If the signature is incorrect
|
|
* If the HANDSHAKE_AUTH value is incorrect
|
|
|
|
* If the circuit is already a rendezvous circuit.
|
|
* If the circuit is already an introduction circuit.
|
|
[TODO: some scalability designs fail there.]
|
|
* If the key is already in use by another circuit.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise, the node must associate the key with the circuit, for use
|
|
later in INTRODUCE1 cells.
|
|
|
|
3.1.1.1. Denial-of-Service Defense Extension. [EST_INTRO_DOS_EXT]
|
|
|
|
This extension can be used to send Denial-of-Service (DoS) parameters to
|
|
the introduction point in order for it to apply them for the introduction
|
|
circuit.
|
|
|
|
If used, it needs to be encoded within the N_EXTENSIONS field of the
|
|
ESTABLISH_INTRO cell defined in the previous section. The content is
|
|
defined as follow:
|
|
|
|
EXT_FIELD_TYPE:
|
|
|
|
[01] -- Denial-of-Service Parameters.
|
|
|
|
If this flag is set, the extension should be used by the introduction
|
|
point to learn what values the denial of service subsystem should be
|
|
using.
|
|
|
|
EXT_FIELD content format is:
|
|
|
|
N_PARAMS [1 byte]
|
|
N_PARAMS times:
|
|
PARAM_TYPE [1 byte]
|
|
PARAM_VALUE [8 byte]
|
|
|
|
The PARAM_TYPE possible values are:
|
|
|
|
[01] -- DOS_INTRODUCE2_RATE_PER_SEC
|
|
The rate per second of INTRODUCE2 cell relayed to the
|
|
service.
|
|
|
|
[02] -- DOS_INTRODUCE2_BURST_PER_SEC
|
|
The burst per second of INTRODUCE2 cell relayed to the
|
|
service.
|
|
|
|
The PARAM_VALUE size is 8 bytes in order to accommodate 64bit values.
|
|
It MUST match the specified limit for the following PARAM_TYPE:
|
|
|
|
[01] -- Min: 0, Max: 2147483647
|
|
[02] -- Min: 0, Max: 2147483647
|
|
|
|
A value of 0 means the defense is disabled. If the rate per second is
|
|
set to 0 (param 0x01) then the burst value should be ignored. And
|
|
vice-versa, if the burst value is 0 (param 0x02), then the rate value
|
|
should be ignored. In other words, setting one single parameter to 0
|
|
disables the defense.
|
|
|
|
The burst can NOT be smaller than the rate. If so, the parameters
|
|
should be ignored by the introduction point.
|
|
|
|
Any valid value does have precedence over the network wide consensus
|
|
parameter.
|
|
|
|
Using this extension extends the payload of the ESTABLISH_INTRO cell by 19
|
|
bytes bringing it from 134 bytes to 155 bytes.
|
|
|
|
This extension can only be used with relays supporting the protocol version
|
|
"HSIntro=5".
|
|
|
|
Introduced in tor-0.4.2.1-alpha.
|
|
|
|
3.1.2. Registering an introduction point on a legacy Tor node
|
|
[LEGACY_EST_INTRO]
|
|
|
|
[This section is obsolete and refers to a workaround for now-obsolete Tor
|
|
relay versions. It is included for historical reasons.]
|
|
|
|
Tor nodes should also support an older version of the ESTABLISH_INTRO
|
|
cell, first documented in rend-spec.txt. New hidden service hosts
|
|
must use this format when establishing introduction points at older
|
|
Tor nodes that do not support the format above in [EST_INTRO].
|
|
|
|
In this older protocol, an ESTABLISH_INTRO cell contains:
|
|
|
|
KEY_LEN [2 bytes]
|
|
KEY [KEY_LEN bytes]
|
|
HANDSHAKE_AUTH [20 bytes]
|
|
SIG [variable, up to end of relay payload]
|
|
|
|
The KEY_LEN variable determines the length of the KEY field.
|
|
|
|
The KEY field is the ASN1-encoded legacy RSA public key that was also
|
|
included in the hidden service descriptor.
|
|
|
|
The HANDSHAKE_AUTH field contains the SHA1 digest of (KH | "INTRODUCE").
|
|
|
|
The SIG field contains an RSA signature, using PKCS1 padding, of all
|
|
earlier fields.
|
|
|
|
Older versions of Tor always use a 1024-bit RSA key for these introduction
|
|
authentication keys.
|
|
|
|
3.1.3. Acknowledging establishment of introduction point [INTRO_ESTABLISHED]
|
|
|
|
After setting up an introduction circuit, the introduction point reports its
|
|
status back to the hidden service host with an INTRO_ESTABLISHED cell.
|
|
|
|
The INTRO_ESTABLISHED cell has the following contents:
|
|
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS [1 byte]
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS times:
|
|
EXT_FIELD_TYPE [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD_LEN [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD [EXT_FIELD_LEN bytes]
|
|
|
|
Older versions of Tor send back an empty INTRO_ESTABLISHED cell instead.
|
|
Services must accept an empty INTRO_ESTABLISHED cell from a legacy relay.
|
|
[The above paragraph is obsolete and refers to a workaround for
|
|
now-obsolete Tor relay versions. It is included for historical reasons.]
|
|
|
|
The same rules for multiplicity, ordering, and handling unknown types
|
|
apply to the extension fields here as described [EST_INTRO] above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.2. Sending an INTRODUCE1 cell to the introduction point. [SEND_INTRO1]
|
|
|
|
In order to participate in the introduction protocol, a client must
|
|
know the following:
|
|
|
|
* An introduction point for a service.
|
|
* The introduction authentication key for that introduction point.
|
|
* The introduction encryption key for that introduction point.
|
|
|
|
The client sends an INTRODUCE1 cell to the introduction point,
|
|
containing an identifier for the service, an identifier for the
|
|
encryption key that the client intends to use, and an opaque blob to
|
|
be relayed to the hidden service host.
|
|
|
|
In reply, the introduction point sends an INTRODUCE_ACK cell back to
|
|
the client, either informing it that its request has been delivered,
|
|
or that its request will not succeed.
|
|
|
|
[TODO: specify what tor should do when receiving a malformed cell. Drop it?
|
|
Kill circuit? This goes for all possible cells.]
|
|
|
|
3.2.1. INTRODUCE1 cell format [FMT_INTRO1]
|
|
|
|
When a client is connecting to an introduction point, INTRODUCE1 cells
|
|
should be of the form:
|
|
|
|
LEGACY_KEY_ID [20 bytes]
|
|
AUTH_KEY_TYPE [1 byte]
|
|
AUTH_KEY_LEN [2 bytes]
|
|
AUTH_KEY [AUTH_KEY_LEN bytes]
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS [1 byte]
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS times:
|
|
EXT_FIELD_TYPE [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD_LEN [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD [EXT_FIELD_LEN bytes]
|
|
ENCRYPTED [Up to end of relay payload]
|
|
|
|
AUTH_KEY_TYPE is defined as in [EST_INTRO]. Currently, the only value of
|
|
AUTH_KEY_TYPE for this cell is an Ed25519 public key [02].
|
|
|
|
The LEGACY_KEY_ID field is used to distinguish between legacy and new style
|
|
INTRODUCE1 cells. In new style INTRODUCE1 cells, LEGACY_KEY_ID is 20 zero
|
|
bytes. Upon receiving an INTRODUCE1 cell, the introduction point checks the
|
|
LEGACY_KEY_ID field. If LEGACY_KEY_ID is non-zero, the INTRODUCE1 cell
|
|
should be handled as a legacy INTRODUCE1 cell by the intro point.
|
|
|
|
Upon receiving a INTRODUCE1 cell, the introduction point checks
|
|
whether AUTH_KEY matches the introduction point authentication key for an
|
|
active introduction circuit. If so, the introduction point sends an
|
|
INTRODUCE2 cell with exactly the same contents to the service, and sends an
|
|
INTRODUCE_ACK response to the client.
|
|
|
|
The same rules for multiplicity, ordering, and handling unknown types
|
|
apply to the extension fields here as described [EST_INTRO] above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.2.2. INTRODUCE_ACK cell format. [INTRO_ACK]
|
|
|
|
An INTRODUCE_ACK cell has the following fields:
|
|
|
|
STATUS [2 bytes]
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS [1 bytes]
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS times:
|
|
EXT_FIELD_TYPE [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD_LEN [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD [EXT_FIELD_LEN bytes]
|
|
|
|
Recognized status values are:
|
|
|
|
[00 00] -- Success: cell relayed to hidden service host.
|
|
[00 01] -- Failure: service ID not recognized
|
|
[00 02] -- Bad message format
|
|
[00 03] -- Can't relay cell to service
|
|
|
|
The same rules for multiplicity, ordering, and handling unknown types
|
|
apply to the extension fields here as described [EST_INTRO] above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.3. Processing an INTRODUCE2 cell at the hidden service. [PROCESS_INTRO2]
|
|
|
|
Upon receiving an INTRODUCE2 cell, the hidden service host checks whether
|
|
the AUTH_KEY or LEGACY_KEY_ID field matches the keys for this
|
|
introduction circuit.
|
|
|
|
The service host then checks whether it has received a cell with these
|
|
contents or rendezvous cookie before. If it has, it silently drops it as a
|
|
replay. (It must maintain a replay cache for as long as it accepts cells
|
|
with the same encryption key. Note that the encryption format below should
|
|
be non-malleable.)
|
|
|
|
If the cell is not a replay, it decrypts the ENCRYPTED field,
|
|
establishes a shared key with the client, and authenticates the whole
|
|
contents of the cell as having been unmodified since they left the
|
|
client. There may be multiple ways of decrypting the ENCRYPTED field,
|
|
depending on the chosen type of the encryption key. Requirements for
|
|
an introduction handshake protocol are described in
|
|
[INTRO-HANDSHAKE-REQS]. We specify one below in section
|
|
[NTOR-WITH-EXTRA-DATA].
|
|
|
|
The decrypted plaintext must have the form:
|
|
|
|
RENDEZVOUS_COOKIE [20 bytes]
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS [1 byte]
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS times:
|
|
EXT_FIELD_TYPE [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD_LEN [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD [EXT_FIELD_LEN bytes]
|
|
ONION_KEY_TYPE [1 bytes]
|
|
ONION_KEY_LEN [2 bytes]
|
|
ONION_KEY [ONION_KEY_LEN bytes]
|
|
NSPEC (Number of link specifiers) [1 byte]
|
|
NSPEC times:
|
|
LSTYPE (Link specifier type) [1 byte]
|
|
LSLEN (Link specifier length) [1 byte]
|
|
LSPEC (Link specifier) [LSLEN bytes]
|
|
PAD (optional padding) [up to end of plaintext]
|
|
|
|
Upon processing this plaintext, the hidden service makes sure that
|
|
any required authentication is present in the extension fields, and
|
|
then extends a rendezvous circuit to the node described in the LSPEC
|
|
fields, using the ONION_KEY to complete the extension. As mentioned
|
|
in [BUILDING-BLOCKS], the "TLS-over-TCP, IPv4" and "Legacy node
|
|
identity" specifiers must be present.
|
|
|
|
As of 0.4.1.1-alpha, clients include both IPv4 and IPv6 link specifiers
|
|
in INTRODUCE1 cells. All available addresses SHOULD be included in the
|
|
cell, regardless of the address that the client actually used to extend
|
|
to the rendezvous point.
|
|
|
|
The hidden service should handle invalid or unrecognised link specifiers
|
|
the same way as clients do in section 2.5.2.2. In particular, services
|
|
MAY perform basic validity checks on link specifiers, and SHOULD NOT
|
|
reject unrecognised link specifiers, to avoid information leaks.
|
|
|
|
The ONION_KEY_TYPE field is:
|
|
|
|
[01] NTOR: ONION_KEY is 32 bytes long.
|
|
|
|
The ONION_KEY field describes the onion key that must be used when
|
|
extending to the rendezvous point. It must be of a type listed as
|
|
supported in the hidden service descriptor.
|
|
|
|
When using a legacy introduction point, the INTRODUCE cells must be padded
|
|
to a certain length using the PAD field in the encrypted portion.
|
|
|
|
Upon receiving a well-formed INTRODUCE2 cell, the hidden service host
|
|
will have:
|
|
|
|
* The information needed to connect to the client's chosen
|
|
rendezvous point.
|
|
* The second half of a handshake to authenticate and establish a
|
|
shared key with the hidden service client.
|
|
* A set of shared keys to use for end-to-end encryption.
|
|
|
|
The same rules for multiplicity, ordering, and handling unknown types
|
|
apply to the extension fields here as described [EST_INTRO] above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.3.1. Introduction handshake encryption requirements [INTRO-HANDSHAKE-REQS]
|
|
|
|
When decoding the encrypted information in an INTRODUCE2 cell, a
|
|
hidden service host must be able to:
|
|
|
|
* Decrypt additional information included in the INTRODUCE2 cell,
|
|
to include the rendezvous token and the information needed to
|
|
extend to the rendezvous point.
|
|
|
|
* Establish a set of shared keys for use with the client.
|
|
|
|
* Authenticate that the cell has not been modified since the client
|
|
generated it.
|
|
|
|
Note that the old TAP-derived protocol of the previous hidden service
|
|
design achieved the first two requirements, but not the third.
|
|
|
|
3.3.2. Example encryption handshake: ntor with extra data
|
|
[NTOR-WITH-EXTRA-DATA]
|
|
|
|
[TODO: relocate this]
|
|
|
|
This is a variant of the ntor handshake (see tor-spec.txt, section
|
|
5.1.4; see proposal 216; and see "Anonymity and one-way
|
|
authentication in key-exchange protocols" by Goldberg, Stebila, and
|
|
Ustaoglu).
|
|
|
|
It behaves the same as the ntor handshake, except that, in addition
|
|
to negotiating forward secure keys, it also provides a means for
|
|
encrypting non-forward-secure data to the server (in this case, to
|
|
the hidden service host) as part of the handshake.
|
|
|
|
Notation here is as in section 5.1.4 of tor-spec.txt, which defines
|
|
the ntor handshake.
|
|
|
|
The PROTOID for this variant is "tor-hs-ntor-curve25519-sha3-256-1".
|
|
We also use the following tweak values:
|
|
|
|
t_hsenc = PROTOID | ":hs_key_extract"
|
|
t_hsverify = PROTOID | ":hs_verify"
|
|
t_hsmac = PROTOID | ":hs_mac"
|
|
m_hsexpand = PROTOID | ":hs_key_expand"
|
|
|
|
To make an INTRODUCE1 cell, the client must know a public encryption
|
|
key B for the hidden service on this introduction circuit. The client
|
|
generates a single-use keypair:
|
|
|
|
x,X = KEYGEN()
|
|
|
|
and computes:
|
|
|
|
intro_secret_hs_input = EXP(B,x) | AUTH_KEY | X | B | PROTOID
|
|
info = m_hsexpand | N_hs_subcred
|
|
hs_keys = KDF(intro_secret_hs_input | t_hsenc | info, S_KEY_LEN+MAC_LEN)
|
|
ENC_KEY = hs_keys[0:S_KEY_LEN]
|
|
MAC_KEY = hs_keys[S_KEY_LEN:S_KEY_LEN+MAC_KEY_LEN]
|
|
|
|
and sends, as the ENCRYPTED part of the INTRODUCE1 cell:
|
|
|
|
CLIENT_PK [PK_PUBKEY_LEN bytes]
|
|
ENCRYPTED_DATA [Padded to length of plaintext]
|
|
MAC [MAC_LEN bytes]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Substituting those fields into the INTRODUCE1 cell body format
|
|
described in [FMT_INTRO1] above, we have
|
|
|
|
LEGACY_KEY_ID [20 bytes]
|
|
AUTH_KEY_TYPE [1 byte]
|
|
AUTH_KEY_LEN [2 bytes]
|
|
AUTH_KEY [AUTH_KEY_LEN bytes]
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS [1 bytes]
|
|
N_EXTENSIONS times:
|
|
EXT_FIELD_TYPE [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD_LEN [1 byte]
|
|
EXT_FIELD [EXT_FIELD_LEN bytes]
|
|
ENCRYPTED:
|
|
CLIENT_PK [PK_PUBKEY_LEN bytes]
|
|
ENCRYPTED_DATA [Padded to length of plaintext]
|
|
MAC [MAC_LEN bytes]
|
|
|
|
|
|
(This format is as documented in [FMT_INTRO1] above, except that here
|
|
we describe how to build the ENCRYPTED portion.)
|
|
|
|
Here, the encryption key plays the role of B in the regular ntor
|
|
handshake, and the AUTH_KEY field plays the role of the node ID.
|
|
The CLIENT_PK field is the public key X. The ENCRYPTED_DATA field is
|
|
the message plaintext, encrypted with the symmetric key ENC_KEY. The
|
|
MAC field is a MAC of all of the cell from the AUTH_KEY through the
|
|
end of ENCRYPTED_DATA, using the MAC_KEY value as its key.
|
|
|
|
To process this format, the hidden service checks PK_VALID(CLIENT_PK)
|
|
as necessary, and then computes ENC_KEY and MAC_KEY as the client did
|
|
above, except using EXP(CLIENT_PK,b) in the calculation of
|
|
intro_secret_hs_input. The service host then checks whether the MAC is
|
|
correct. If it is invalid, it drops the cell. Otherwise, it computes
|
|
the plaintext by decrypting ENCRYPTED_DATA.
|
|
|
|
The hidden service host now completes the service side of the
|
|
extended ntor handshake, as described in tor-spec.txt section 5.1.4,
|
|
with the modified PROTOID as given above. To be explicit, the hidden
|
|
service host generates a keypair of y,Y = KEYGEN(), and uses its
|
|
introduction point encryption key 'b' to compute:
|
|
|
|
intro_secret_hs_input = EXP(X,b) | AUTH_KEY | X | B | PROTOID
|
|
info = m_hsexpand | N_hs_subcred
|
|
hs_keys = KDF(intro_secret_hs_input | t_hsenc | info, S_KEY_LEN+MAC_LEN)
|
|
HS_DEC_KEY = hs_keys[0:S_KEY_LEN]
|
|
HS_MAC_KEY = hs_keys[S_KEY_LEN:S_KEY_LEN+MAC_KEY_LEN]
|
|
|
|
(The above are used to check the MAC and then decrypt the
|
|
encrypted data.)
|
|
|
|
rend_secret_hs_input = EXP(X,y) | EXP(X,b) | AUTH_KEY | B | X | Y | PROTOID
|
|
NTOR_KEY_SEED = MAC(rend_secret_hs_input, t_hsenc)
|
|
verify = MAC(rend_secret_hs_input, t_hsverify)
|
|
auth_input = verify | AUTH_KEY | B | Y | X | PROTOID | "Server"
|
|
AUTH_INPUT_MAC = MAC(auth_input, t_hsmac)
|
|
|
|
(The above are used to finish the ntor handshake.)
|
|
|
|
The server's handshake reply is:
|
|
|
|
SERVER_PK Y [PK_PUBKEY_LEN bytes]
|
|
AUTH AUTH_INPUT_MAC [MAC_LEN bytes]
|
|
|
|
These fields will be sent to the client in a RENDEZVOUS1 cell using the
|
|
HANDSHAKE_INFO element (see [JOIN_REND]).
|
|
|
|
The hidden service host now also knows the keys generated by the
|
|
handshake, which it will use to encrypt and authenticate data
|
|
end-to-end between the client and the server. These keys are as
|
|
computed in tor-spec.txt section 5.1.4.
|
|
|
|
3.4. Authentication during the introduction phase. [INTRO-AUTH]
|
|
|
|
Hidden services may restrict access only to authorized users.
|
|
One mechanism to do so is the credential mechanism, where only users who
|
|
know the credential for a hidden service may connect at all.
|
|
|
|
3.4.1. Ed25519-based authentication.
|
|
|
|
To authenticate with an Ed25519 private key, the user must include an
|
|
extension field in the encrypted part of the INTRODUCE1 cell with an
|
|
EXT_FIELD_TYPE type of [02] and the contents:
|
|
|
|
Nonce [16 bytes]
|
|
Pubkey [32 bytes]
|
|
Signature [64 bytes]
|
|
|
|
Nonce is a random value. Pubkey is the public key that will be used
|
|
to authenticate. [TODO: should this be an identifier for the public
|
|
key instead?] Signature is the signature, using Ed25519, of:
|
|
|
|
"hidserv-userauth-ed25519"
|
|
Nonce (same as above)
|
|
Pubkey (same as above)
|
|
AUTH_KEY (As in the INTRODUCE1 cell)
|
|
|
|
The hidden service host checks this by seeing whether it recognizes
|
|
and would accept a signature from the provided public key. If it
|
|
would, then it checks whether the signature is correct. If it is,
|
|
then the correct user has authenticated.
|
|
|
|
Replay prevention on the whole cell is sufficient to prevent replays
|
|
on the authentication.
|
|
|
|
Users SHOULD NOT use the same public key with multiple hidden
|
|
services.
|
|
|
|
4. The rendezvous protocol
|
|
|
|
Before connecting to a hidden service, the client first builds a
|
|
circuit to an arbitrarily chosen Tor node (known as the rendezvous
|
|
point), and sends an ESTABLISH_RENDEZVOUS cell. The hidden service
|
|
later connects to the same node and sends a RENDEZVOUS cell. Once
|
|
this has occurred, the relay forwards the contents of the RENDEZVOUS
|
|
cell to the client, and joins the two circuits together.
|
|
|
|
Single Onion Services attempt to build a non-anonymous single-hop circuit,
|
|
but use an anonymous 3-hop circuit if:
|
|
|
|
* the rend point is on an address that is configured as unreachable via
|
|
a direct connection, or
|
|
* the initial attempt to connect to the rend point over a single-hop
|
|
circuit fails, and they are retrying the rend point connection.
|
|
|
|
4.1. Establishing a rendezvous point [EST_REND_POINT]
|
|
|
|
The client sends the rendezvous point a RELAY_COMMAND_ESTABLISH_RENDEZVOUS
|
|
cell containing a 20-byte value.
|
|
|
|
RENDEZVOUS_COOKIE [20 bytes]
|
|
|
|
Rendezvous points MUST ignore any extra bytes in an
|
|
ESTABLISH_RENDEZVOUS cell. (Older versions of Tor did not.)
|
|
|
|
The rendezvous cookie is an arbitrary 20-byte value, chosen randomly
|
|
by the client. The client SHOULD choose a new rendezvous cookie for
|
|
each new connection attempt. If the rendezvous cookie is already in
|
|
use on an existing circuit, the rendezvous point should reject it and
|
|
destroy the circuit.
|
|
|
|
Upon receiving an ESTABLISH_RENDEZVOUS cell, the rendezvous point associates
|
|
the cookie with the circuit on which it was sent. It replies to the client
|
|
with an empty RENDEZVOUS_ESTABLISHED cell to indicate success. Clients MUST
|
|
ignore any extra bytes in a RENDEZVOUS_ESTABLISHED cell.
|
|
|
|
The client MUST NOT use the circuit which sent the cell for any
|
|
purpose other than rendezvous with the given location-hidden service.
|
|
|
|
The client should establish a rendezvous point BEFORE trying to
|
|
connect to a hidden service.
|
|
|
|
4.2. Joining to a rendezvous point [JOIN_REND]
|
|
|
|
To complete a rendezvous, the hidden service host builds a circuit to
|
|
the rendezvous point and sends a RENDEZVOUS1 cell containing:
|
|
|
|
RENDEZVOUS_COOKIE [20 bytes]
|
|
HANDSHAKE_INFO [variable; depends on handshake type
|
|
used.]
|
|
|
|
where RENDEZVOUS_COOKIE is the cookie suggested by the client during the
|
|
introduction (see [PROCESS_INTRO2]) and HANDSHAKE_INFO is defined in
|
|
[NTOR-WITH-EXTRA-DATA].
|
|
|
|
If the cookie matches the rendezvous cookie set on any
|
|
not-yet-connected circuit on the rendezvous point, the rendezvous
|
|
point connects the two circuits, and sends a RENDEZVOUS2 cell to the
|
|
client containing the HANDSHAKE_INFO field of the RENDEZVOUS1 cell.
|
|
|
|
Upon receiving the RENDEZVOUS2 cell, the client verifies that HANDSHAKE_INFO
|
|
correctly completes a handshake. To do so, the client parses SERVER_PK from
|
|
HANDSHAKE_INFO and reverses the final operations of section
|
|
[NTOR-WITH-EXTRA-DATA] as shown here:
|
|
|
|
rend_secret_hs_input = EXP(Y,x) | EXP(B,x) | AUTH_KEY | B | X | Y | PROTOID
|
|
NTOR_KEY_SEED = MAC(ntor_secret_input, t_hsenc)
|
|
verify = MAC(ntor_secret_input, t_hsverify)
|
|
auth_input = verify | AUTH_KEY | B | Y | X | PROTOID | "Server"
|
|
AUTH_INPUT_MAC = MAC(auth_input, t_hsmac)
|
|
|
|
Finally the client verifies that the received AUTH field of HANDSHAKE_INFO
|
|
is equal to the computed AUTH_INPUT_MAC.
|
|
|
|
Now both parties use the handshake output to derive shared keys for use on
|
|
the circuit as specified in the section below:
|
|
|
|
4.2.1. Key expansion
|
|
|
|
The hidden service and its client need to derive crypto keys from the
|
|
NTOR_KEY_SEED part of the handshake output. To do so, they use the KDF
|
|
construction as follows:
|
|
|
|
K = KDF(NTOR_KEY_SEED | m_hsexpand, HASH_LEN * 2 + S_KEY_LEN * 2)
|
|
|
|
The first HASH_LEN bytes of K form the forward digest Df; the next HASH_LEN
|
|
bytes form the backward digest Db; the next S_KEY_LEN bytes form Kf, and the
|
|
final S_KEY_LEN bytes form Kb. Excess bytes from K are discarded.
|
|
|
|
Subsequently, the rendezvous point passes relay cells, unchanged, from each
|
|
of the two circuits to the other. When Alice's OP sends RELAY cells along
|
|
the circuit, it authenticates with Df, and encrypts them with the Kf, then
|
|
with all of the keys for the ORs in Alice's side of the circuit; and when
|
|
Alice's OP receives RELAY cells from the circuit, it decrypts them with the
|
|
keys for the ORs in Alice's side of the circuit, then decrypts them with Kb,
|
|
and checks integrity with Db. Bob's OP does the same, with Kf and Kb
|
|
interchanged.
|
|
|
|
[TODO: Should we encrypt HANDSHAKE_INFO as we did INTRODUCE2
|
|
contents? It's not necessary, but it could be wise. Similarly, we
|
|
should make it extensible.]
|
|
|
|
4.3. Using legacy hosts as rendezvous points
|
|
|
|
[This section is obsolete and refers to a workaround for now-obsolete Tor
|
|
relay versions. It is included for historical reasons.]
|
|
|
|
The behavior of ESTABLISH_RENDEZVOUS is unchanged from older versions
|
|
of this protocol, except that relays should now ignore unexpected
|
|
bytes at the end.
|
|
|
|
Old versions of Tor required that RENDEZVOUS cell payloads be exactly
|
|
168 bytes long. All shorter rendezvous payloads should be padded to
|
|
this length with random bytes, to make them difficult to distinguish from
|
|
older protocols at the rendezvous point.
|
|
|
|
Relays older than 0.2.9.1 should not be used for rendezvous points by next
|
|
generation onion services because they enforce too-strict length checks to
|
|
rendezvous cells. Hence the "HSRend" protocol from proposal#264 should be
|
|
used to select relays for rendezvous points.
|
|
|
|
5. Encrypting data between client and host
|
|
|
|
A successfully completed handshake, as embedded in the
|
|
INTRODUCE/RENDEZVOUS cells, gives the client and hidden service host
|
|
a shared set of keys Kf, Kb, Df, Db, which they use for sending
|
|
end-to-end traffic encryption and authentication as in the regular
|
|
Tor relay encryption protocol, applying encryption with these keys
|
|
before other encryption, and decrypting with these keys before other
|
|
decryption. The client encrypts with Kf and decrypts with Kb; the
|
|
service host does the opposite.
|
|
|
|
6. Encoding onion addresses [ONIONADDRESS]
|
|
|
|
The onion address of a hidden service includes its identity public key, a
|
|
version field and a basic checksum. All this information is then base32
|
|
encoded as shown below:
|
|
|
|
onion_address = base32(PUBKEY | CHECKSUM | VERSION) + ".onion"
|
|
CHECKSUM = H(".onion checksum" | PUBKEY | VERSION)[:2]
|
|
|
|
where:
|
|
- PUBKEY is the 32 bytes ed25519 master pubkey of the hidden service.
|
|
- VERSION is a one byte version field (default value '\x03')
|
|
- ".onion checksum" is a constant string
|
|
- CHECKSUM is truncated to two bytes before inserting it in onion_address
|
|
|
|
Here are a few example addresses:
|
|
|
|
pg6mmjiyjmcrsslvykfwnntlaru7p5svn6y2ymmju6nubxndf4pscryd.onion
|
|
sp3k262uwy4r2k3ycr5awluarykdpag6a7y33jxop4cs2lu5uz5sseqd.onion
|
|
xa4r2iadxm55fbnqgwwi5mymqdcofiu3w6rpbtqn7b2dyn7mgwj64jyd.onion
|
|
|
|
For more information about this encoding, please see our discussion thread
|
|
at [ONIONADDRESS-REFS].
|
|
|
|
7. Open Questions:
|
|
|
|
Scaling hidden services is hard. There are on-going discussions that
|
|
you might be able to help with. See [SCALING-REFS].
|
|
|
|
How can we improve the HSDir unpredictability design proposed in
|
|
[SHAREDRANDOM]? See [SHAREDRANDOM-REFS] for discussion.
|
|
|
|
How can hidden service addresses become memorable while retaining
|
|
their self-authenticating and decentralized nature? See
|
|
[HUMANE-HSADDRESSES-REFS] for some proposals; many more are possible.
|
|
|
|
Hidden Services are pretty slow. Both because of the lengthy setup
|
|
procedure and because the final circuit has 6 hops. How can we make
|
|
the Hidden Service protocol faster? See [PERFORMANCE-REFS] for some
|
|
suggestions.
|
|
|
|
References:
|
|
|
|
[KEYBLIND-REFS]:
|
|
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/8106
|
|
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2012-September/004026.html
|
|
|
|
[KEYBLIND-PROOF]:
|
|
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2013-December/005943.html
|
|
|
|
[SHAREDRANDOM-REFS]:
|
|
https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/proposals/250-commit-reveal-consensus.txt
|
|
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/8244
|
|
|
|
[SCALING-REFS]:
|
|
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2013-October/005556.html
|
|
|
|
[HUMANE-HSADDRESSES-REFS]:
|
|
https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/blob/HEAD:/proposals/ideas/xxx-onion-nyms.txt
|
|
http://archives.seul.org/or/dev/Dec-2011/msg00034.html
|
|
|
|
[PERFORMANCE-REFS]:
|
|
"Improving Efficiency and Simplicity of Tor circuit
|
|
establishment and hidden services" by Overlier, L., and
|
|
P. Syverson
|
|
|
|
[TODO: Need more here! Do we have any? :( ]
|
|
|
|
[ATTACK-REFS]:
|
|
"Trawling for Tor Hidden Services: Detection, Measurement,
|
|
Deanonymization" by Alex Biryukov, Ivan Pustogarov,
|
|
Ralf-Philipp Weinmann
|
|
|
|
"Locating Hidden Servers" by Lasse Øverlier and Paul
|
|
Syverson
|
|
|
|
[ED25519-REFS]:
|
|
"High-speed high-security signatures" by Daniel
|
|
J. Bernstein, Niels Duif, Tanja Lange, Peter Schwabe, and
|
|
Bo-Yin Yang. http://cr.yp.to/papers.html#ed25519
|
|
|
|
[ED25519-B-REF]:
|
|
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-josefsson-eddsa-ed25519-03#section-5:
|
|
|
|
[PRNG-REFS]:
|
|
http://projectbullrun.org/dual-ec/ext-rand.html
|
|
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2015-November/009954.html
|
|
|
|
[SRV-TP-REFS]:
|
|
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-April/010759.html
|
|
|
|
[VANITY-REFS]:
|
|
https://github.com/Yawning/horse25519
|
|
|
|
[ONIONADDRESS-REFS]:
|
|
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2017-January/011816.html
|
|
|
|
[TORSION-REFS]:
|
|
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2017-April/012164.html
|
|
https://getmonero.org/2017/05/17/disclosure-of-a-major-bug-in-cryptonote-based-currencies.html
|
|
|
|
Appendix A. Signature scheme with key blinding [KEYBLIND]
|
|
|
|
A.1. Key derivation overview
|
|
|
|
As described in [IMD:DIST] and [SUBCRED] above, we require a "key
|
|
blinding" system that works (roughly) as follows:
|
|
|
|
There is a master keypair (sk, pk).
|
|
|
|
Given the keypair and a nonce n, there is a derivation function
|
|
that gives a new blinded keypair (sk_n, pk_n). This keypair can
|
|
be used for signing.
|
|
|
|
Given only the public key and the nonce, there is a function
|
|
that gives pk_n.
|
|
|
|
Without knowing pk, it is not possible to derive pk_n; without
|
|
knowing sk, it is not possible to derive sk_n.
|
|
|
|
It's possible to check that a signature was made with sk_n while
|
|
knowing only pk_n.
|
|
|
|
Someone who sees a large number of blinded public keys and
|
|
signatures made using those public keys can't tell which
|
|
signatures and which blinded keys were derived from the same
|
|
master keypair.
|
|
|
|
You can't forge signatures.
|
|
|
|
[TODO: Insert a more rigorous definition and better references.]
|
|
|
|
A.2. Tor's key derivation scheme
|
|
|
|
We propose the following scheme for key blinding, based on Ed25519.
|
|
|
|
(This is an ECC group, so remember that scalar multiplication is the
|
|
trapdoor function, and it's defined in terms of iterated point
|
|
addition. See the Ed25519 paper [Reference ED25519-REFS] for a fairly
|
|
clear writeup.)
|
|
|
|
Let B be the ed25519 basepoint as found in section 5 of [ED25519-B-REF]:
|
|
|
|
B = (15112221349535400772501151409588531511454012693041857206046113283949847762202,
|
|
46316835694926478169428394003475163141307993866256225615783033603165251855960)
|
|
|
|
Assume B has prime order l, so lB=0. Let a master keypair be written as
|
|
(a,A), where a is the private key and A is the public key (A=aB).
|
|
|
|
To derive the key for a nonce N and an optional secret s, compute the
|
|
blinding factor like this:
|
|
|
|
h = H(BLIND_STRING | A | s | B | N)
|
|
BLIND_STRING = "Derive temporary signing key" | INT_1(0)
|
|
N = "key-blind" | INT_8(period-number) | INT_8(period_length)
|
|
B = "(1511[...]2202, 4631[...]5960)"
|
|
|
|
then clamp the blinding factor 'h' according to the ed25519 spec:
|
|
|
|
h[0] &= 248;
|
|
h[31] &= 63;
|
|
h[31] |= 64;
|
|
|
|
and do the key derivation as follows:
|
|
|
|
private key for the period:
|
|
|
|
a' = h a mod l
|
|
RH' = SHA-512(RH_BLIND_STRING | RH)[:32]
|
|
RH_BLIND_STRING = "Derive temporary signing key hash input"
|
|
|
|
public key for the period:
|
|
|
|
A' = h A = (ha)B
|
|
|
|
Generating a signature of M: given a deterministic random-looking r
|
|
(see EdDSA paper), take R=rB, S=r+hash(R,A',M)ah mod l. Send signature
|
|
(R,S) and public key A'.
|
|
|
|
Verifying the signature: Check whether SB = R+hash(R,A',M)A'.
|
|
|
|
(If the signature is valid,
|
|
SB = (r + hash(R,A',M)ah)B
|
|
= rB + (hash(R,A',M)ah)B
|
|
= R + hash(R,A',M)A' )
|
|
|
|
This boils down to regular Ed25519 with key pair (a', A').
|
|
|
|
See [KEYBLIND-REFS] for an extensive discussion on this scheme and
|
|
possible alternatives. Also, see [KEYBLIND-PROOF] for a security
|
|
proof of this scheme.
|
|
|
|
Appendix B. Selecting nodes [PICKNODES]
|
|
|
|
Picking introduction points
|
|
Picking rendezvous points
|
|
Building paths
|
|
Reusing circuits
|
|
|
|
(TODO: This needs a writeup)
|
|
|
|
Appendix C. Recommendations for searching for vanity .onions [VANITY]
|
|
|
|
EDITORIAL NOTE: The author thinks that it's silly to brute-force the
|
|
keyspace for a key that, when base-32 encoded, spells out the name of
|
|
your website. It also feels a bit dangerous to me. If you train your
|
|
users to connect to
|
|
|
|
llamanymityx4fi3l6x2gyzmtmgxjyqyorj9qsb5r543izcwymle.onion
|
|
|
|
I worry that you're making it easier for somebody to trick them into
|
|
connecting to
|
|
|
|
llamanymityb4sqi0ta0tsw6uovyhwlezkcrmczeuzdvfauuemle.onion
|
|
|
|
Nevertheless, people are probably going to try to do this, so here's a
|
|
decent algorithm to use.
|
|
|
|
To search for a public key with some criterion X:
|
|
|
|
Generate a random (sk,pk) pair.
|
|
|
|
While pk does not satisfy X:
|
|
|
|
Add the number 8 to sk
|
|
Add the point 8*B to pk
|
|
|
|
Return sk, pk.
|
|
|
|
We add 8 and 8*B, rather than 1 and B, so that sk is always a valid
|
|
Curve25519 private key, with the lowest 3 bits equal to 0.
|
|
|
|
This algorithm is safe [source: djb, personal communication] [TODO:
|
|
Make sure I understood correctly!] so long as only the final (sk,pk)
|
|
pair is used, and all previous values are discarded.
|
|
|
|
To parallelize this algorithm, start with an independent (sk,pk) pair
|
|
generated for each independent thread, and let each search proceed
|
|
independently.
|
|
|
|
See [VANITY-REFS] for a reference implementation of this vanity .onion
|
|
search scheme.
|
|
|
|
Appendix D. Numeric values reserved in this document
|
|
|
|
[TODO: collect all the lists of commands and values mentioned above]
|
|
|
|
Appendix E. Reserved numbers
|
|
|
|
We reserve these certificate type values for Ed25519 certificates:
|
|
|
|
[08] short-term descriptor signing key, signed with blinded
|
|
public key. (Section 2.4)
|
|
[09] intro point authentication key, cross-certifying the descriptor
|
|
signing key. (Section 2.5)
|
|
[0B] ed25519 key derived from the curve25519 intro point encryption key,
|
|
cross-certifying the descriptor signing key. (Section 2.5)
|
|
|
|
Note: The value "0A" is skipped because it's reserved for the onion key
|
|
cross-certifying ntor identity key from proposal 228.
|
|
|
|
Appendix F. Hidden service directory format [HIDSERVDIR-FORMAT]
|
|
|
|
This appendix section specifies the contents of the HiddenServiceDir directory:
|
|
|
|
- "hostname" [FILE]
|
|
|
|
This file contains the onion address of the onion service.
|
|
|
|
- "private_key_ed25519" [FILE]
|
|
|
|
This file contains the private master ed25519 key of the onion service.
|
|
[TODO: Offline keys]
|
|
|
|
- "./authorized_clients/" [DIRECTORY]
|
|
"./authorized_clients/alice.auth" [FILE]
|
|
"./authorized_clients/bob.auth" [FILE]
|
|
"./authorized_clients/charlie.auth" [FILE]
|
|
|
|
If client authorization is enabled, this directory MUST contain a ".auth"
|
|
file for each authorized client. Each such file contains the public key of
|
|
the respective client. The files are transmitted to the service operator by
|
|
the client.
|
|
|
|
See section [CLIENT-AUTH-MGMT] for more details and the format of the client file.
|
|
|
|
(NOTE: client authorization is implemented as of 0.3.5.1-alpha.)
|
|
|
|
Appendix G. Managing authorized client data [CLIENT-AUTH-MGMT]
|
|
|
|
Hidden services and clients can configure their authorized client data either
|
|
using the torrc, or using the control port. This section presents a suggested
|
|
scheme for configuring client authorization. Please see appendix
|
|
[HIDSERVDIR-FORMAT] for more information about relevant hidden service files.
|
|
|
|
(NOTE: client authorization is implemented as of 0.3.5.1-alpha.)
|
|
|
|
G.1. Configuring client authorization using torrc
|
|
|
|
G.1.1. Hidden Service side configuration
|
|
|
|
A hidden service that wants to enable client authorization, needs to
|
|
populate the "authorized_clients/" directory of its HiddenServiceDir
|
|
directory with the ".auth" files of its authorized clients.
|
|
|
|
When Tor starts up with a configured onion service, Tor checks its
|
|
<HiddenServiceDir>/authorized_clients/ directory for ".auth" files, and if
|
|
any recognized and parseable such files are found, then client
|
|
authorization becomes activated for that service.
|
|
|
|
G.1.2. Service-side bookkeeping
|
|
|
|
This section contains more details on how onion services should be keeping
|
|
track of their client ".auth" files.
|
|
|
|
For the "descriptor" authentication type, the ".auth" file MUST contain
|
|
the x25519 public key of that client. Here is a suggested file format:
|
|
|
|
<auth-type>:<key-type>:<base32-encoded-public-key>
|
|
|
|
Here is an an example:
|
|
|
|
descriptor:x25519:OM7TGIVRYMY6PFX6GAC6ATRTA5U6WW6U7A4ZNHQDI6OVL52XVV2Q
|
|
|
|
Tor SHOULD ignore lines it does not recognize.
|
|
Tor SHOULD ignore files that don't use the ".auth" suffix.
|
|
|
|
G.1.3. Client side configuration
|
|
|
|
A client who wants to register client authorization data for onion
|
|
services needs to add the following line to their torrc to indicate the
|
|
directory which hosts ".auth_private" files containing client-side
|
|
credentials for onion services:
|
|
|
|
ClientOnionAuthDir <DIR>
|
|
|
|
The <DIR> contains a file with the suffix ".auth_private" for each onion
|
|
service the client is authorized with. Tor should scan the directory for
|
|
".auth_private" files to find which onion services require client
|
|
authorization from this client.
|
|
|
|
For the "descriptor" auth-type, a ".auth_private" file contains the
|
|
private x25519 key:
|
|
|
|
<onion-address>:descriptor:x25519:<base32-encoded-privkey>
|
|
|
|
The keypair used for client authorization is created by a third party tool
|
|
for which the public key needs to be transferred to the service operator
|
|
in a secure out-of-band way. The third party tool SHOULD add appropriate
|
|
headers to the private key file to ensure that users won't accidentally
|
|
give out their private key.
|
|
|
|
G.2. Configuring client authorization using the control port
|
|
|
|
G.2.1. Service side
|
|
|
|
A hidden service also has the option to configure authorized clients
|
|
using the control port. The idea is that hidden service operators can use
|
|
controller utilities that manage their access control instead of using
|
|
the filesystem to register client keys.
|
|
|
|
Specifically, we require a new control port command ADD_ONION_CLIENT_AUTH
|
|
which is able to register x25519/ed25519 public keys tied to a specific
|
|
authorized client.
|
|
[XXX figure out control port command format]
|
|
|
|
Hidden services who use the control port interface for client auth need
|
|
to perform their own key management.
|
|
|
|
G.2.2. Client side
|
|
|
|
There should also be a control port interface for clients to register
|
|
authorization data for hidden services without having to use the
|
|
torrc. It should allow both generation of client authorization private
|
|
keys, and also to import client authorization data provided by a hidden
|
|
service
|
|
|
|
This way, Tor Browser can present "Generate client auth keys" and "Import
|
|
client auth keys" dialogs to users when they try to visit a hidden service
|
|
that is protected by client authorization.
|
|
|
|
Specifically, we require two new control port commands:
|
|
IMPORT_ONION_CLIENT_AUTH_DATA
|
|
GENERATE_ONION_CLIENT_AUTH_DATA
|
|
which import and generate client authorization data respectively.
|
|
|
|
[XXX how does key management work here?]
|
|
[XXX what happens when people use both the control port interface and the
|
|
filesystem interface?]
|
|
|
|
Appendix F. Two methods for managing revision counters.
|
|
|
|
Implementations MAY generate revision counters in any way they please,
|
|
so long as they are monotonically increasing over the lifetime of each
|
|
blinded public key. But to avoid fingerprinting, implementors SHOULD
|
|
choose a strategy also used by other Tor implementations. Here we
|
|
describe two, and additionally list some strategies that implementors
|
|
should NOT use.
|
|
|
|
F.1. Increment-on-generation
|
|
|
|
This is the simplest strategy, and the one used by Tor through at
|
|
least version 0.3.4.0-alpha.
|
|
|
|
Whenever using a new blinded key, the service records the
|
|
highest revision counter it has used with that key. When generating
|
|
a descriptor, the service uses the smallest non-negative number
|
|
higher than any number it has already used.
|
|
|
|
In other words, the revision counters under this system start fresh
|
|
with each blinded key as 0, 1, 2, 3, and so on.
|
|
|
|
F.2. Encrypted time in period
|
|
|
|
This scheme is what we recommend for situations when multiple
|
|
service instances need to coordinate their revision counters,
|
|
without an actual coordination mechanism.
|
|
|
|
Let T be the number of seconds that have elapsed since the descriptor
|
|
became valid, plus 1. (T must be at least 1.) Implementations can use the
|
|
number of seconds since the start time of the shared random protocol run
|
|
that corresponds to this descriptor.
|
|
|
|
Let S be a secret that all the service providers share. For
|
|
example, it could be the private signing key corresponding to the
|
|
current blinded key.
|
|
|
|
Let K be an AES-256 key, generated as
|
|
K = H("rev-counter-generation" | S)
|
|
|
|
Use K, and AES in counter mode with IV=0, to generate a stream of T
|
|
* 2 bytes. Consider these bytes as a sequence of T 16-bit
|
|
little-endian words. Add these words.
|
|
|
|
Let the sum of these words be the revision counter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryptowiki attributes roughly this scheme to G. Bebek in:
|
|
|
|
G. Bebek. Anti-tamper database research: Inference control
|
|
techniques. Technical Report EECS 433 Final Report, Case
|
|
Western Reserve University, November 2002.
|
|
|
|
Although we believe it is suitable for use in this application, it
|
|
is not a perfect order-preserving encryption algorithm (and all
|
|
order-preserving encryption has weaknesses). Please think twice
|
|
before using it for anything else.
|
|
|
|
(This scheme can be optimized pretty easily by caching the encryption of
|
|
X*1, X*2, X*3, etc for some well chosen X.)
|
|
|
|
For a slow reference implementation, see src/test/ope_ref.py in the
|
|
Tor source repository. [XXXX for now, see the same file in Nick's
|
|
"ope_hax" branch -- it isn't merged yet.]
|
|
|
|
This scheme is not currently implemented in Tor.
|
|
|
|
F.X. Some revision-counter strategies to avoid
|
|
|
|
Though it might be tempting, implementations SHOULD NOT use the
|
|
current time or the current time within the period directly as their
|
|
revision counter -- doing so leaks their view of the current time,
|
|
which can be used to link the onion service to other services run on
|
|
the same host.
|
|
|
|
Similarly, implementations SHOULD NOT let the revision counter
|
|
increase forever without resetting it -- doing so links the service
|
|
across changes in the blinded public key.
|