mirror of
https://github.com/torproject/torspec.git
synced 2024-12-16 15:07:09 +00:00
250 lines
11 KiB
Plaintext
250 lines
11 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
Tor bridges specification
|
|
|
|
0. Preface
|
|
|
|
This document describes the design decisions around support for bridge
|
|
users, bridge relays, and bridge authorities. It acts as an overview
|
|
of the bridge design and deployment for developers, and it also tries
|
|
to point out limitations in the current design and implementation.
|
|
|
|
For more details on what all of these mean, look at blocking.tex in
|
|
/doc/design-paper/
|
|
|
|
1. Bridge relays
|
|
|
|
Bridge relays are just like normal Tor relays except they don't publish
|
|
their server descriptors to the main directory authorities.
|
|
|
|
1.1. PublishServerDescriptor
|
|
|
|
To configure your relay to be a bridge relay, just add
|
|
BridgeRelay 1
|
|
PublishServerDescriptor bridge
|
|
to your torrc. This will cause your relay to publish its descriptor
|
|
to the bridge authorities rather than to the default authorities.
|
|
|
|
Alternatively, you can say
|
|
BridgeRelay 1
|
|
PublishServerDescriptor 0
|
|
which will cause your relay to not publish anywhere. This could be
|
|
useful for private bridges.
|
|
|
|
1.2. Recommendations.
|
|
|
|
Bridge relays should use an exit policy of "reject *:*". This is
|
|
because they only need to relay traffic between the bridge users
|
|
and the rest of the Tor network, so there's no need to let people
|
|
exit directly from them.
|
|
|
|
We invented the RelayBandwidth* options for this situation: Tor clients
|
|
who want to allow relaying too. See proposal 111 for details. Relay
|
|
operators should feel free to rate-limit their relayed traffic.
|
|
|
|
1.3. Implementation note.
|
|
|
|
Vidalia 0.0.15 has turned its "Relay" settings page into a tri-state
|
|
"Don't relay" / "Relay for the Tor network" / "Help censored users".
|
|
|
|
If you click the third choice, it forces your exit policy to reject *:*.
|
|
|
|
If all the bridges end up on port 9001, that's not so good. On the
|
|
other hand, putting the bridges on a low-numbered port in the Unix
|
|
world requires jumping through extra hoops. The current compromise is
|
|
that Vidalia makes the ORPort default to 443 on Windows, and 9001 on
|
|
other platforms.
|
|
|
|
At the bottom of the relay config settings window, Vidalia displays
|
|
the bridge identifier to the operator (see Section 3.1) so he can pass
|
|
it on to bridge users.
|
|
|
|
2. Bridge authorities.
|
|
|
|
Bridge authorities are like normal v3 directory authorities, except
|
|
they don't create their own network-status documents or votes. So if
|
|
you ask a bridge authority for a network-status document or consensus,
|
|
they behave like a directory mirror: they give you one from one of
|
|
the main authorities. But if you ask the bridge authority for the
|
|
descriptor corresponding to a particular identity fingerprint, it will
|
|
happily give you the latest descriptor for that fingerprint.
|
|
|
|
To become a bridge authority, add these lines to your torrc:
|
|
AuthoritativeDirectory 1
|
|
BridgeAuthoritativeDir 1
|
|
|
|
Right now there's one bridge authority, running on the Tonga relay.
|
|
|
|
2.1. Exporting bridge-purpose descriptors
|
|
|
|
We've added a new purpose for server descriptors: the "bridge"
|
|
purpose. With the new router-descriptors file format that includes
|
|
annotations, it's easy to look through it and find the bridge-purpose
|
|
descriptors.
|
|
|
|
Currently we export the bridge descriptors from Tonga to the
|
|
BridgeDB server, so it can give them out according to the policies
|
|
in blocking.pdf.
|
|
|
|
2.2. Reachability/uptime testing
|
|
|
|
Right now the bridge authorities do active reachability testing of
|
|
bridges, so we know which ones to recommend for users.
|
|
|
|
But in the design document, we suggested that bridges should publish
|
|
anonymously (i.e. via Tor) to the bridge authority, so somebody watching
|
|
the bridge authority can't just enumerate all the bridges. But if we're
|
|
doing active measurement, the game is up. Perhaps we should back off on
|
|
this goal, or perhaps we should do our active measurement anonymously?
|
|
|
|
Answering this issue is scheduled for 0.2.1.x.
|
|
|
|
2.3. Future work: migrating to multiple bridge authorities
|
|
|
|
Having only one bridge authority is both a trust bottleneck (if you
|
|
break into one place you learn about every single bridge we've got)
|
|
and a robustness bottleneck (when it's down, bridge users become sad).
|
|
|
|
Right now if we put up a second bridge authority, all the bridges would
|
|
publish to it, and (assuming the code works) bridge users would query
|
|
a random bridge authority. This resolves the robustness bottleneck,
|
|
but makes the trust bottleneck even worse.
|
|
|
|
In 0.2.2.x and later we should think about better ways to have multiple
|
|
bridge authorities.
|
|
|
|
3. Bridge users.
|
|
|
|
Bridge users are like ordinary Tor users except they use encrypted
|
|
directory connections by default, and they use bridge relays as both
|
|
entry guards (their first hop) and directory guards (the source of
|
|
all their directory information).
|
|
|
|
To become a bridge user, add the following line to your torrc:
|
|
UseBridges 1
|
|
|
|
and then add at least one "Bridge" line to your torrc based on the
|
|
format below.
|
|
|
|
3.1. Format of the bridge identifier.
|
|
|
|
The canonical format for a bridge identifier contains an IP address,
|
|
an ORPort, and an identity fingerprint:
|
|
bridge 128.31.0.34:9009 4C17 FB53 2E20 B2A8 AC19 9441 ECD2 B017 7B39 E4B1
|
|
|
|
However, the identity fingerprint can be left out, in which case the
|
|
bridge user will connect to that relay and use it as a bridge regardless
|
|
of what identity key it presents:
|
|
bridge 128.31.0.34:9009
|
|
This might be useful for cases where only short bridge identifiers
|
|
can be communicated to bridge users.
|
|
|
|
In a future version we may also support bridge identifiers that are
|
|
only a key fingerprint:
|
|
bridge 4C17 FB53 2E20 B2A8 AC19 9441 ECD2 B017 7B39 E4B1
|
|
and the bridge user can fetch the latest descriptor from the bridge
|
|
authority (see Section 3.4).
|
|
|
|
3.2. Bridges as entry guards
|
|
|
|
For now, bridge users add their bridge relays to their list of "entry
|
|
guards" (see path-spec.txt for background on entry guards). They are
|
|
managed by the entry guard algorithms exactly as if they were a normal
|
|
entry guard -- their keys and timing get cached in the "state" file,
|
|
etc. This means that when the Tor user starts up with "UseBridges"
|
|
disabled, he will skip past the bridge entries since they won't be
|
|
listed as up and usable in his networkstatus consensus. But to be clear,
|
|
the "entry_guards" list doesn't currently distinguish guards by purpose.
|
|
|
|
Internally, each bridge user keeps a smartlist of "bridge_info_t"
|
|
that reflects the "bridge" lines from his torrc along with a download
|
|
schedule (see Section 3.5 below). When he starts Tor, he attempts
|
|
to fetch a descriptor for each configured bridge (see Section 3.4
|
|
below). When he succeeds at getting a descriptor for one of the bridges
|
|
in his list, he adds it directly to the entry guard list using the
|
|
normal add_an_entry_guard() interface. Once a bridge descriptor has
|
|
been added, should_delay_dir_fetches() will stop delaying further
|
|
directory fetches, and the user begins to bootstrap his directory
|
|
information from that bridge (see Section 3.3).
|
|
|
|
Currently bridge users cache their bridge descriptors to the
|
|
"cached-descriptors" file (annotated with purpose "bridge"), but
|
|
they don't make any attempt to reuse descriptors they find in this
|
|
file. The theory is that either the bridge is available now, in which
|
|
case you can get a fresh descriptor, or it's not, in which case an
|
|
old descriptor won't do you much good.
|
|
|
|
We could disable writing out the bridge lines to the state file, if
|
|
we think this is a problem.
|
|
|
|
As an exception, if we get an application request when we have one
|
|
or more bridge descriptors but we believe none of them are running,
|
|
we mark them all as running again. This is similar to the exception
|
|
already in place to help long-idle Tor clients realize they should
|
|
fetch fresh directory information rather than just refuse requests.
|
|
|
|
3.3. Bridges as directory guards
|
|
|
|
In addition to using bridges as the first hop in their circuits, bridge
|
|
users also use them to fetch directory updates. Other than initial
|
|
bootstrapping to find a working bridge descriptor (see Section 3.4
|
|
below), all further non-anonymized directory fetches will be redirected
|
|
to the bridge.
|
|
|
|
This means that bridge relays need to have cached answers for all
|
|
questions the bridge user might ask. This makes the upgrade path
|
|
tricky --- for example, if we migrate to a v4 directory design, the
|
|
bridge user would need to keep using v3 so long as his bridge relays
|
|
only knew how to answer v3 queries.
|
|
|
|
In a future design, for cases where the user has enough information
|
|
to build circuits yet the chosen bridge doesn't know how to answer a
|
|
given query, we might teach bridge users to make an anonymized request
|
|
to a more suitable directory server.
|
|
|
|
3.4. How bridge users get their bridge descriptor
|
|
|
|
Bridge users can fetch bridge descriptors in two ways: by going directly
|
|
to the bridge and asking for "/tor/server/authority", or by going to
|
|
the bridge authority and asking for "/tor/server/fp/ID". By default,
|
|
they will only try the direct queries. If the user sets
|
|
UpdateBridgesFromAuthority 1
|
|
in his config file, then he will try querying the bridge authority
|
|
first for bridges where he knows a digest (if he only knows an IP
|
|
address and ORPort, then his only option is a direct query).
|
|
|
|
If the user has at least one working bridge, then he will do further
|
|
queries to the bridge authority through a full three-hop Tor circuit.
|
|
But when bootstrapping, he will make a direct begin_dir-style connection
|
|
to the bridge authority.
|
|
|
|
As of Tor 0.2.0.10-alpha, if the user attempts to fetch a descriptor
|
|
from the bridge authority and it returns a 404 not found, the user
|
|
will automatically fall back to trying a direct query. Therefore it is
|
|
recommended that bridge users always set UpdateBridgesFromAuthority,
|
|
since at worst it will delay their fetches a little bit and notify
|
|
the bridge authority of the identity fingerprint (but not location)
|
|
of their intended bridges.
|
|
|
|
3.5. Bridge descriptor retry schedule
|
|
|
|
Bridge users try to fetch a descriptor for each bridge (using the
|
|
steps in Section 3.4 above) on startup. Whenever they receive a
|
|
bridge descriptor, they reschedule a new descriptor download for 1
|
|
hour from then.
|
|
|
|
If on the other hand it fails, they try again after 15 minutes for the
|
|
first attempt, after 15 minutes for the second attempt, and after 60
|
|
minutes for subsequent attempts.
|
|
|
|
In 0.2.2.x we should come up with some smarter retry schedules.
|
|
|
|
3.6. Implementation note.
|
|
|
|
Vidalia 0.1.0 has a new checkbox in its Network config window called
|
|
"My ISP blocks connections to the Tor network." Users who click that
|
|
box change their configuration to:
|
|
UseBridges 1
|
|
UpdateBridgesFromAuthority 1
|
|
and should add at least one bridge identifier.
|
|
|