PRISM vs Tor

By now, just about everybody has heard about the PRISM surveillance program, and many are beginning to speculate on its impact on Tor.

Unfortunately, there still are a lot of gaps to fill in terms of understanding what is really going on, especially in the face of conflicting information between the primary source material and Google, Facebook, and Apple's claims of non-involvement.

This apparent conflict means that it is still hard to pin down exactly how the program impacts Tor, and is leading many to assume worst-case scenarios.

For example, some of the worst-case scenarios include the NSA using weaponized exploits to compromise datacenter equipment at these firms. Less severe, but still extremely worrying possibilities include issuing gag orders to mid or low-level datacenter staff to install backdoors or monitoring equipment without any interaction what-so-ever with the legal and executive staff of the firms themselves.

We're going to save analysis of those speculative and invasive scenarios for when more information becomes available (though we may independently write a future blog post on the dangers of the government use of weaponized exploits).

For now, let's review what Tor can do, what tools go well with Tor to give you defense-in-depth for your communications, and what work needs to be done so we can make it easier to protect communications from instances where the existing centralized communications infrastructure is compromised by the NSA, China, Iran, or by anyone else who manages to get ahold of the keys to the kingdom.

The core Tor software's job is to conceal your identity from your recipient, and to conceal your recipient and your content from observers on your end. By itself, Tor does not protect the actual communications content once it leaves the Tor network. This can make it useful against some forms of metadata analysis, but this also means Tor is best used in combination with other tools.

Through the use of HTTPS-Everywhere in Tor Browser, in many cases we can protect your communications content where parts of the Tor network and/or your recipients' infrastructure are compromised or under surveillance. The EFF has created an excellent interactive graphic to help illustrate and clarify these combined properties.

Through the use of combinations of additional software like TorBirdy and Enigmail, OTR, and Diaspora, Tor can also protect your communications content in cases where the communications infrastructure (Google/Facebook) is compromised.

However, the real interesting use cases for Tor in the face of dragnet surveillance like this is not that Tor can protect your gmail/facebook accounts from analysis (in fact, Tor could never really protect account usage metadata), but that Tor and hidden services are actually a key building block to build systems where it is no longer possible to go to a single party and obtain the full metadata, communications frequency, *or* contents.

Tor hidden services are arbitrary communications endpoints that are resistant to both metadata analysis and surveillance.

A simple (to deploy) example of a hidden service based mechanism to significantly hinder exactly this type of surveillance is an XMPP client that also ships with an XMPP server and a Tor hidden service. Such a P2P communication system (where the clients are themselves the servers) is both end-to-end secure, and does *not* have a single central server where metadata is available. This communication is private, pseudonymous, and does not have involve any single central party or intermediary.

More complex examples would include the use of Diaspora and other decentralized social network protocols with hidden service endpoints.

Despite these compelling use cases and powerful tool combination possibilities, the Tor Project is under no illusion that these more sophisticated configurations are easy, usable, or accessible by the general public.

We recognize that a lot of work needs to be done even for the basic tools like Tor Browser, TorBirdy, EnigMail, and OTR to work seamlessly and securely for most users, let alone complex combinations like XMPP or Diaspora with Hidden Services.

Additionally, hidden services themselves are in need of quite a bit of development assistance just to maintain their originally designed level of security, let alone scaling to support large numbers of endpoints.

Being an Open Source project with limited resources, we welcome contributions from the community to make any of this software work better with Tor, or to help improve the Tor software itself.

If you're not a developer, but you would still like to help us succeed in our mission of securing the world's communications, please donate! It is a rather big job, after all.

We will keep you updated as we learn more about the exact capabilities of this program.

Anonymous

June 12, 2013

Permalink

Diaspora... WOW.

We are seeing the beginning, but I fear your mention of DIASPORA* is misplaced. I predict it will die a silent death if only because of their ignorance of Web 3.0, i.e. the new RDF based communications model. They are ignorant. (*shock* I thought it was only the corporate suits that were ignorant!?)

"sarahmei closed the issue January 08, 2012"

No one is going to custom write libraries for every new DIASPORA* that comes along! I'm not, that's for sure. They believed that if they just built a brand new protocol and API, they would come. (Ignoring all the same protocols already implemented in RDF at the same time.) No, we will not. I really don't have the time. No one does. We will write a FOAF and a SIOC RDFa parser, ONCE, and THAT IS IT. We will not change our code to accommodate Salmon (I prefer rock fish) or whatever new API comes along. We will not write a JSON parser for your new gizmo.

No. Just no. This "is something we can certainly think about" but maybe we should think just a little harder. Enough excuses. I do not trust your Ruby code enough to run it. I will proxy my curl calls through Tor, maybe, if I have time. I am not in the Silicon Valley API game and I don't want to be. DIASPORA* will take their lead in the industry and they will flush it down the toilet and the movement will falter, pushing the dream of a decentralized world that much farther away. They will waste the time of countless talented programmers and dreamers. And the consequences will spread far beyond DIASPORA* and in to every decentralized communication project.

So I am glad you linked to the other projects. Hopefully that will be enough. [P.S. this is a shorter, sanitized version of a longer diatribe I also submitted for moderation.]

Isn't RDF related to Internet becoming a total surveillance database?

cf. Paul Marks: Pentagon Sets Its Sights On Social Networking Websites
New Scientist #2555, 2006

Anonymous

June 13, 2013

Permalink

Now that we know that the NSA (and probably other intelligence agencies in other countries) listens on communications that crosses borders, should we consider to configure TorBrowser to (by default) use entrynodes from the country that we live in?

Or do we all need to use bridges like people in China and Iran, when our own governments "hates freedom" as much as they do?

Anonymous

June 14, 2013

Permalink

Several of the links in the post are not HTTPS (TLS-encrypted).

How concerned need we be that (when using Tor) over the risk of of exit nodes altering content at such sites? (In subtle, yet critical ways that would likely go undetected.) (Via MITM/ injection/ whatever)

Anonymous

June 14, 2013

Permalink

I really dislike all these Tor sites like Tor2Web that allow you to browse .onion sites from your own browser without installing Tor. They are not safe in anyway. Tor shouldn't allow them.

Anonymous

June 15, 2013

Permalink

I legitimately found an underground warrior vs lion underground gambling association.
Thank you Tor.

Anonymous

June 15, 2013

Permalink

If 2,048 bit encryption isn't enough, why not start developing 4,096 bit, or 8,128 bit methods?

Anonymous

June 15, 2013

Permalink

What in NSA or wherever it calls is able to controla big amount of tor exit nodes ?

What if they started to spend billions in order to buy super fast computers, only to decrypt Tor ?

I know that my questions may seem a little bit stupid ones but i am pretty sure i am not the only one waiting for answers

Anonymous

June 16, 2013

Permalink

Hi!

I do not know the technical ins and outs, but the whole episode caused two thoughts:
a) Conservative people and organisations should be wary. What the IRS did to them, could be repeated here using the NSA
b) It is scary. If Tor is not absolutely safe, it serves as a service to point out that "these people use Tor, so they have something to hide. Focus on them!"

What do you -- or others here -- think about these issues?

I have seen posted several times a rumour that intelligence agencies in the USA keep a list of regular Tor users with the help of major ISPs. If you find this hard to believe look up "Main Core" on Wikipedia. This is one of the reasons I use a VPN.

Anonymous

June 16, 2013

Permalink

To anyone who is worried about the last mile problem (ie, unencrypted http-connections).

I'm working on a way to create ubiquitous encryption a reality.

It works by specifying anonymous client certificates for each and every account at each web site. It makes account management easier and safer than email addresses and passwords.

It deploys DNSSEC and DANE to protect against evil Certificate Authorities that try to MitM your browser.

It uses https (TLS) at every step so it protects against passive snooping. Making it safe to use NSA's Tor exit nodes to request a copy of the US-consitution :-)

By encrypting all data all the times, people that really need to rely on Tor, whistleblowers, journalists are better hidden in the noise. Even when you and I use it to post pictures on facebook.

It's open source code (AGPL3+) on my site: http://eccentric-authentication.org/
There are some demos too.

Cheers, Guido.

Sounds very interesting.

Have you discussed this at all with anyone at the Tor Project?

Perhaps you could collaborate with them?

Anonymous

June 17, 2013

Permalink

While it is true that what I don't know about this esoterica would fill volumes, I am aware of some larger issues that deserve our profound consideration. To roughly paraphrase, "because we CAN do a thing, does it follow that we SHOULD"? I am referring , of course, to the whole concept of making public/civilian electronic communications absolutely inviolate to snooping.

Why would anyone even question the effort? A worthy question on the surface, but deeper thinking recalls the tragic events of 9/11. There can be no doubt whatsoever that the 9/11 conspirators not only exploited, but depended on the wholesale freedoms of American society to plot and execute their atrocities. While, in principal, the idea of being snooped upon is almost instinctively repugnant, do we really want to play into the hands of evil-doers of all descriptions by facilitating their means of hiding their communications from the "sunshine"? IMHO, a strong case can be made for the position that "if you have nothing to hide, what difference does it make in the big picture"?

I am not naive to the possibility/probability of abuse, but I am prepared to take a stand when evaluating the relative risk of quasi-perfectly secure civilian communications. To me, the risk of allowing the evil plans of terrorists and enemy states plotting murder and mayhem against my country to go undetected DEFINITELY outweighs the risk of having my "right" to privacy impinged upon.

Mass surveillance and data rentention have nothing to do with stopping terrorist attacks. Even full-blown hardcore totalitarian police/surveillance states can't stop terrorist attacks. This is about the state having power over the individual. With a detailed history of your habits they can manipulate data to make you look bad, make you look guilty, find out your weaknesses, blackmail you or whatever they want. They can use this as a weapon against anyone who becomes a threat to them by speaking out, becoming a whistleblower, posting anti-government messages, etc. This is about the state having a monopoly on information, privacy and power.

- I am aware of some larger issues that deserve our profound consideration.

I certainly hope the profound consideration you mention is more than an appeal to fear.

- I am referring , of course, to the whole concept of making public/civilian electronic communications absolutely inviolate to snooping.

You seam to be implying that those in government have the right to private communications, but members of the public do not.

- There can be no doubt whatsoever that the 9/11 conspirators not only exploited, but depended on the wholesale freedoms of American society to plot and execute their atrocities. While, in principal, the idea of being snooped upon is almost instinctively repugnant, do we really want to play into the hands of evil-doers of all descriptions by facilitating their means of hiding their communications from the "sunshine"?

The 9/11 conspirators used public roads. Do we really want to play into the hands of evil-doers of all descriptions by facilitating their means of transportation?

You use the word "sunshine" to describe wholesale spying on everyone, by unaccountable persons, conducted in secret.

- IMHO, a strong case can be made for the position that "if you have nothing to hide, what difference does it make in the big picture"?

Having everything you do recorded for later scrutiny by those in power, is antithetical to the notion of a free society.

- I am not naive to the possibility/probability of abuse,

You are astoundingly naive.

- but I am prepared to take a stand when evaluating the relative risk of quasi-perfectly secure civilian communications.

This stand you are prepared to take certainly is not one based on principal. Your reaction to terrorism is what makes it effective, your willingness to abandon the bill of rights and fundamentally change our society. Are there any rights you are not willing to give up at the mere mention of 9/11? The presumption of innocence perhaps? If we imprison everyone we will imprison all of the terrorists. Or the right of assembly? If we outlaw meting in groups of three or more, criminal conspiracies will be more difficult. If you find these notions objectionable, than I ask what makes these rights more valuable than your right to privacy?

- To me, the risk of allowing the evil plans of terrorists and enemy states plotting murder and mayhem against my country to go undetected DEFINITELY outweighs the risk of having my "right" to privacy impinged upon.

I think you use of quotation marks here is very telling.

"the 9/11 conspirators not only exploited, but depended on the wholesale freedoms of American society to plot and execute their atrocities. "

What about all of the atrocities, murder and mayhem executed by the U.S. and other "good" states?

Perhaps you should start with some Chomsky. Listen/read carefully, apply critical thought, verify and check-out the sources he cites, form your own judgments.

"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
- Hermann Goering, during his trial at Nuremberg

Read about "Blowback" to find out why terrorists attacks happen. They don't happen because of lack of police or lack of spying on the people. Read some Ron Paul

I would have agreed with this in 2001, but I have to be more objective now. How many people died on 9/11? How many people have died in every terrorist attack since? The actual risk of your dying in a terrorist attack are not that great. If we all give up our freedom to avoid immediate loss of life for a small few because we are scared of being one of the few, they have won. We need to take our licks, and respond appropriately.

Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves. - Abe Lincoln

This has nothing to do with your privacy. The tiny possibility that TOR is used to communicate plans of terrorism, rather than a far more secure meeting in the middle of nowhere, is not a good reason to reduce everyone to carefully monitored sheep. Just in case is no justification for intrusions into privacy,

If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter - George Washington.

A couple of quotes there for you, from the people that BUILT your country, and would be disgusted by your safety over freedom argument.

If one thing can be gained from PRISM, it is that everyone has something to hide, no matter how insignificant it seems, and everyone should have the right to do so.

Anonymous

June 17, 2013

Permalink

I've been using TorBrowser over the last few weeks, reading the news and blogs instead of an ordinary browser. I'm getting used to it. It works well. However, viewing Vidalia's network map connections at the bottom of my screen as I surf the web shows that roughly 99.9 percent of the time I'm using one of the same three entry nodes. Always the same three regardless of restarts and time between using Tor. When I start up it will immediately connect to one of those three first.

I'm in Australia. I have the latest version of TorBrowser which I downloaded using the previous version. I suspect it's not supposed to do this. Once or twice would be a coincidence, but everyday, nearly every time?

I can post the names of the three If it helps. Apologies if this is normal or covered elsewhere.

Anonymous

June 18, 2013

Permalink

The over-reliance on technical 'solutions' at the expense of so called 'humint' contributed, in large part, to the failures leading up to the WTC attacks. Ironically, the response has been to redouble the effort and expenditure on the discredited methodology of trawling for pearls. At the time of the aforementioned attacks, data-mining was in full swing, but an intelligence service run by dullards is self-defeating, as the attackers demonstrated. So now a larger net is used, which will result in a exponential rise in false positives that will prove impossible to investigate meaningfully. All the while, beneath the radar, plotters will run their organisations using grubby scraps of paper and the occasional innocuous telephone call over public lines. All that is being created is a growing undercurrent of fear fed upon by corrupt security services, profiteering armaments manufacturers and self-aggrandizing, power hungry politicians.

Anonymous

June 18, 2013

Permalink

Why WOULDN'T the NSA, et al operate as many exit nodes, entry guards, bridges, etc. as they possibly could?

Anonymous

June 21, 2013

Permalink

I have reason to think that the use of Tor may set off some sort of flag with the NSA or some other organization. While the traffic itself is secure, the endpoints may not necessarily be so, as your documentation makes note of. I have noticed a number of anomalous things after recently using TOR. And since I am sure you do not include any back doors, etc, I must conclude that unless one uses different relay servers other than the defaults, you may run the risk of showing up on someone's radar, though they have no idea of what you may have been doing when USING TOR.

I noticed for example my computer's camera coming on by itself. I also noticed behavior on my system symptomatic of password/keystroke capture systems. Having worked with Computer Security in one way or another since 1986, including with companies who performed contracts with the government, I recognize that something is going on. I suspect that it may very well be of government origin, perhaps even using zero day exploits discovered in the Windows operating system, such as STUXNET uses. Against which none of our current security measures have any real defense.

Anonymous

June 25, 2013

Permalink

Hi folks,

Nice to know people are dead against a surveillance society but one thing bothers me about all this:

Why does no one ever mention the massive 1.5 petabytes of personal data, including lifestyle and purchase data, that Experian has collected over the years on the Worlds population????

In my book Experian are capable of more personal damage than any Gov agency and as it's in the hands of private enterprise and does not carry the penalty of a criminal record it is not strictly legislated against or controlled.

I know from first hand experience that 'employee vetting' for example prevents me from getting a decent job as I have unserviced debts left over from when I was made redundant last, through no fault of my own.

Folks, remember I said this, and remember we're all under control from a private system that controls you via your pocket.

Bring down the 5th column that threatens us all.

Anonymous

Anonymous

June 27, 2013

Permalink

@runasand @torproject #prism #facebook #google To me it seems that the tor problem can never be really solved by negotiating with the agents of the prism - i use anonymox to interface with them. Solving the problem is critical for all the users of such services - an amount of billion users? Could tor have a service of which the end point is (static ip etc) like on aninmox, so that tor/anonymox would not just be swapped but integrated? Additionally could Out of the record messaging OTR be provided as a additional option?

Anonymous

June 28, 2013

Permalink

All I know is Tor is not effective against the NSA, FBI, DEA etc. Anyone would be a fool to think otherwise. Don't ask how I know, I've said too much already. Using Tor to post this message and I feel the heat already. The Feds have the biggest and brightest working to stay ahead of the game and they have all our tax dollars behind them. Do we really stand a chance? Go stone age? Not likely.

Anonymous

June 28, 2013

Permalink

All I know is Tor is not effective against the NSA, FBI, DEA etc. Anyone would be a fool to think otherwise. Don't ask how I know, I've said too much already. Using Tor to post this message and I feel the heat already. The Feds have the biggest and brightest working to stay ahead of the game and they have all our tax dollars behind them. Do we really stand a chance? Go stone age? Not likely.

Anonymous

June 28, 2013

Permalink

Im sure the NSA runs quite many TOR Outproxys to scan them for interesitng informations !!

Anonymous

July 01, 2013

Permalink

Quite often it looks like the first hop from my computer in the USA is to somewhere on another continent. Does this not invite further scrutiny from the NSA? A reply by someone familiar with Tor would be appreciated.

Anonymous

July 05, 2013

Permalink

Y'all are diddling yourselves. Just like modern medicine in America, you're "treating symptoms" rather than "curing disease". The root cause of the symptoms stemming from the disease at issue is "The Patriot Act" (and successor versions, plus whatall-and-whatever has since followed therefrom). Repeal the Act, and/or "defund" its continuing implementation(s). This is a "political" Problem, which necessitates a "political" Solution. Refer especially to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution -- which makes it perfectly plain and patently obvious that "Big Brother" has vastly both over-reached and over-stepped with The Patriot Act (et alia) in knee-jerk over-reaction to "9/11". Write your Senators and Representative, join/support one or more groups/organzations that exist to oppose "Big Brother" over-reach/over-step, and otherwise START to individually act to "cure the disease" rather than react to it a la merely "treating symptoms" Besides which, there ain't NO WAY that "clever smarts" will ever defeat the limitless combination of "legality" and "taxation" that THE STATE can easily and readily align and employ against nebulously-defined "suspected" AND/OR "prospectively-suspect" TERRORIST ENTITIES! No doubt exists in my mind that YOU ALL (and now me, too) have a "classified file" (somewhere) with each our names on it. "Day late, dollar short" applies -- and EVER will be so in this instance.

Anonymous

August 04, 2013

Permalink

Any information on the text below? Curious if it is been debunked or is a real threat. Not my words, but supposedly from someone that is in the know.

If you run TOR, with java script enabled:

What the exploit does:

The JavaScript zero-day exploit that creates a unique cookie and sends a request to a random server that basically fingerprints your browser in some way, which is probably then correlated somewhere else since the cookie doesn't get deleted.

Presumably it reports the users origin IP back to the FBI.

Anonymous

August 05, 2013

Permalink

Im reading so mutch about free jornalists but where are they?

An exampel:
Every western country has shown bulshit about the turkey in the media. A minority of idiots + some Organised groops (which profits from the hapenings) started to destroy the City and the Media here in the west was like: "The turks are agains Erdogan because he is a muslim and the Islam is evil." Do you realy think they would choose him as the President if he would be sutch evil?
I dont give a f*ck for journalism since it doesnt exist (at least in the west, turkeys media had shown news which where pro and agains Erdogan\the fake freedom fighters, I dont know how and if the Media works at the eastern countrys).

But even if not for jornalists im sure that the TOR project could help some people
( Im not one of them but at least I feel beter if I know that not everythink I do is Analysed by some one. You dont need to know that I need Wikipedia to understand how marmalade is mayde).

Anonymous

August 06, 2013

Permalink

Looks like you were dead on with those weaponized exploits. Even though the the exploit the FBI used to compromise TOR will soon be out completely burned, there will be no way to know for sure they don't have an next gen exploit deployed. TOR can't guarantee anonymity and I just hope they haven't cracked AES-256