mirror of
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor.git
synced 2024-11-27 22:03:31 +01:00
Initial low-level changes to section 4
svn:r696
This commit is contained in:
parent
38400b3098
commit
3ae1331088
@ -692,15 +692,17 @@ in Section~\ref{sec:attacks}.
|
||||
\label{sec:design}
|
||||
|
||||
The Tor network is an overlay network; each node is called an onion router
|
||||
(OR). Onion routers run on normal computers without needing any special
|
||||
privileges. Each OR maintains a long-term TLS connection to every other
|
||||
OR (although we look at ways to relax this clique-topology assumption in
|
||||
(OR). Onion routers run as normal user-level processes without needing
|
||||
any special
|
||||
privileges. Currently, each OR maintains a long-term TLS connection
|
||||
to every other
|
||||
OR. (We examine some ways to relax this clique-topology assumption in
|
||||
section \ref{subsec:restricted-routes}). A subset of the ORs also act as
|
||||
directory servers, tracking which routers are currently in the network;
|
||||
see section \ref{subsec:dirservers} for directory server details. Users
|
||||
run local software called an onion proxy (OP) that fetches directories,
|
||||
establishes paths (called \emph{virtual circuits}) over the network,
|
||||
and handles connections from the user applications. Onion proxies accept
|
||||
run local software called an onion proxy (OP) to fetch directories,
|
||||
establish paths (called \emph{virtual circuits}) across the network,
|
||||
and handle connections from user applications. Onion proxies accept
|
||||
TCP streams and multiplex them across the virtual circuit. The onion
|
||||
router on the other side
|
||||
% I don't mean other side, I mean wherever it is on the circuit. But
|
||||
@ -708,44 +710,51 @@ router on the other side
|
||||
of the circuit connects to the destinations of
|
||||
the TCP streams and relays data.
|
||||
|
||||
Onion routers have three types of keys. The first key is the identity
|
||||
(signing) key. An OR uses this key to sign TLS certificates, to sign its
|
||||
router descriptor (a summary of its keys, address, bandwidth, exit policy,
|
||||
etc), and to sign directories if it is a directory server. Changing the
|
||||
identity key of a router is considered equivalent to creating a new
|
||||
router. The second key is the onion (decryption) key, which is used
|
||||
for decrypting requests from users to set up a circuit and negotiate
|
||||
ephemeral keys. Thirdly, each OR shares link keys (generated by TLS)
|
||||
with the other ORs it's connected to. We discuss rotating these keys in
|
||||
Section \ref{subsec:rotating-keys}.
|
||||
Each onion router uses three public keys: a long-term identity key, a
|
||||
short-term onion key, and a short-term link key. The identity
|
||||
(signing) key is used to sign TLS certificates, to sign its router
|
||||
descriptor (a summary of its keys, address, bandwidth, exit policy,
|
||||
etc), and to sign directories if it is a directory server. Changing
|
||||
the identity key of a router is considered equivalent to creating a
|
||||
new router. The onion (decryption) key is used for decrypting requests
|
||||
from users to set up a circuit and negotiate ephemeral keys. Finally,
|
||||
link keys are used by the TLS protocol when communicating between
|
||||
onion routers. We discuss rotating these keys in Section
|
||||
\ref{subsec:rotating-keys}.
|
||||
|
||||
Section \ref{subsec:cells} discusses the structure of the fixed-size
|
||||
\emph{cells} that are the unit of communication in Tor. We describe
|
||||
in Section \ref{subsec:circuits} how circuits work, and how they are
|
||||
in section \ref{subsec:circuits} how virtual circuits are
|
||||
built, extended, truncated, and destroyed. Section \ref{subsec:tcp}
|
||||
discusses the process of opening TCP streams through Tor, and finally
|
||||
describes how TCP streams are routed through the network, and finally
|
||||
Section \ref{subsec:congestion} talks about congestion control and
|
||||
fairness issues.
|
||||
|
||||
\SubSection{Cells}
|
||||
\label{subsec:cells}
|
||||
|
||||
Traffic passes from node to node in fixed-size cells. Each cell is 256
|
||||
bytes, and consists of a header and a payload. The header includes the
|
||||
circuit identifier (ACI) which specifies which circuit the cell refers to
|
||||
% I think we should describe connections before cells. -NM
|
||||
|
||||
Traffic passes from one OR to another, or from a user's OP to an OR,
|
||||
in fixed-size cells. Each cell is 256
|
||||
bytes, and consists of a header and a payload. The header includes an
|
||||
anonymous circuit identifier (ACI) the specifies which circuit the
|
||||
cell refers to
|
||||
(many circuits can be multiplexed over the single TCP connection between
|
||||
ORs or between an OP and an OR), and a command to describe what to do
|
||||
with the cell's payload. Cells are either control cells, meaning they are
|
||||
intended to be interpreted by the node that receives them, or relay cells,
|
||||
meaning they carry end-to-end stream data. Controls cells can be one of:
|
||||
\emph{padding} (currently used for keepalive, but can be used for link
|
||||
padding), \emph{create} or \emph{created} (to set up a new circuit),
|
||||
with the cell's payload. Cells are either \emph{control} cells, which are
|
||||
interpreted by the node that receives them, or \emph{relay} cells,
|
||||
whichcarry end-to-end stream data. Controls cells can be one of:
|
||||
\emph{padding} (currently used for keepalive, but also usable for link
|
||||
padding); \emph{create} or \emph{created} (used to set up a new circuit);
|
||||
or \emph{destroy} (to tear down a circuit).
|
||||
% We need to say that ACIs are connection-specific: each circuit has
|
||||
% a different ACI along each connection. -NM
|
||||
|
||||
Relay cells have an additional header (the relay header) after the
|
||||
cell header, which specifies the stream identifier (many streams can
|
||||
be multiplexed over a circuit), an end-to-end checksum for integrity
|
||||
checking, the length of the relay payload, and a relay command. Relay
|
||||
cell header, containing a the stream identifier (many streams can
|
||||
be multiplexed over a circuit); an end-to-end checksum for integrity
|
||||
checking; the length of the relay payload; and a relay command. Relay
|
||||
commands can be one of: \emph{relay
|
||||
data} (for data flowing down the stream), \emph{relay begin} (to open a
|
||||
stream), \emph{relay end} (to close a stream), \emph{relay connected}
|
||||
@ -756,36 +765,48 @@ and to acknowledge), \emph{relay truncate} and \emph{relay truncated}
|
||||
sendme} (used for congestion control), and \emph{relay drop} (used to
|
||||
implement long-range dummies).
|
||||
|
||||
We will talk more about each of these cell types below.
|
||||
We describe each of these cell types in more detail below.
|
||||
|
||||
% Nick: should there have been a table here? -RD
|
||||
% Maybe. -NM
|
||||
|
||||
\SubSection{Circuits and streams}
|
||||
\label{subsec:circuits}
|
||||
|
||||
While the original Onion Routing design built one circuit for each stream,
|
||||
Tor circuits can be used by many streams. Thus because circuits can
|
||||
take several tenths of a second to construct due to crypto and network
|
||||
latency, users construct circuits preemptively. Users build a new circuit
|
||||
periodically (currently every minute) if the previous one has been used,
|
||||
and expire old used circuits that are no longer in use. Thus even very
|
||||
active users spend a negligible amount of time and CPU in building
|
||||
circuits, but only a limited number of requests can be linked to each
|
||||
other by a given exit node. Also, because circuits are built in the
|
||||
background, an already failed router never affects the user experience.
|
||||
% I think when we say ``the user,'' maybe we should say ``the user's OP.''
|
||||
|
||||
Users set up circuits incrementally, negotiating a symmetric key with
|
||||
each hop one at a time. To create a new circuit, the user (call her
|
||||
Alice) sends a \emph{create} cell to the first node in her chosen
|
||||
path. The payload is the first half of the Diffie-Hellman handshake,
|
||||
encrypted to the onion key of the OR (call him Bob). Bob responds with a
|
||||
\emph{created} cell with the second half of the DH handshake, along with
|
||||
a hash of $K=g^{xy}$. The goal is to get unilateral entity authentication
|
||||
(Alice knows she's handshaking with Bob, Bob doesn't care who it is ---
|
||||
recall that Alice has no key and is trying to remain anonymous) and
|
||||
unilateral key authentication (Alice and Bob agree on a key, and Alice
|
||||
knows Bob is the only other person who could know it --- if he is
|
||||
honest, etc.). We also want perfect forward secrecy, key freshness, etc.
|
||||
The original Onion Routing design built one circuit for each
|
||||
TCP stream. Because building a circuit can take several tenths of a
|
||||
second (due to public-key cryptography delays and network latency),
|
||||
this design imposed high costs on applications like web browsing that
|
||||
open many TCP streams.
|
||||
|
||||
In Tor, each circuit can be shared by many TCP streams. To avoid
|
||||
delays, users construct circuits preemptively. To limit linkability
|
||||
among the streams, users rotate connections by building a new circuit
|
||||
periodically (currently every minute) if the previous one has been
|
||||
used, and expire old used circuits that are no longer in use. Thus
|
||||
even very active users spend a negligible amount of time and CPU in
|
||||
building circuits, but only a limited number of requests can be linked
|
||||
to each other by a given exit node. Also, because circuits are built
|
||||
in the background, failed routers do not affects user experience.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Constructing a circuit}
|
||||
|
||||
Users construct each incrementally, negotiating a symmetric key with
|
||||
each hop one at a time. To begin creating a new circuit, the user
|
||||
(call her Alice) sends a \emph{create} cell to the first node in her
|
||||
chosen path. The cell's payload is the first half of the
|
||||
Diffie-Hellman handshake, encrypted to the onion key of the OR (call
|
||||
him Bob). Bob responds with a \emph{created} cell containg the second
|
||||
half of the DH handshake, along with a hash of the negotiated key
|
||||
$K=g^{xy}$. This protocol tries to achieve unilateral entity
|
||||
authentication (Alice knows she's handshaking with Bob, Bob doesn't
|
||||
care who is opening the circuit---Alice has no key and is trying to
|
||||
remain anonymous); unilateral key authentication (Alice and Bob
|
||||
agree on a key, and Alice knows Bob is the only other person who could
|
||||
know it). We also want perfect forward
|
||||
secrecy, key freshness, etc.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\begin{aligned}
|
||||
@ -805,6 +826,9 @@ traditional Dolev-Yao model.
|
||||
% cite Cathy? -RD
|
||||
% did I use the buzzwords correctly? -RD
|
||||
|
||||
% Hm. I think that this paragraph could go earlier in expository
|
||||
% order: we describe how to build whole circuit, then explain the
|
||||
% protocol in more detail. -NM
|
||||
To extend a circuit past the first hop, Alice sends a \emph{relay extend}
|
||||
cell to the last node in the circuit, specifying the address of the new
|
||||
OR and an encrypted $g^x$ for it. That node copies the half-handshake
|
||||
@ -813,6 +837,7 @@ circuit. When it responds with a \emph{created} cell, the penultimate OR
|
||||
copies the payload into a \emph{relay extended} cell and passes it back.
|
||||
% Nick: please fix my "that OR" pronouns -RD
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Relay cells}
|
||||
Once Alice has established the circuit (so she shares a key with each
|
||||
OR on the circuit), she can send relay cells.
|
||||
The stream ID in the relay header indicates to which stream the cell belongs.
|
||||
@ -835,7 +860,7 @@ in the circuit receives the destroy cell, closes all open streams on
|
||||
that circuit, and passes a new destroy cell forward. But since circuits
|
||||
can be built incrementally, they can also be torn down incrementally:
|
||||
Alice can send a relay truncate cell to a node along the circuit. That
|
||||
node will send a destroy cell forward, and reply with an acknowledgement
|
||||
node will send a destroy cell forward, and reply with an acknowledgment
|
||||
(relay truncated). Alice might truncate her circuit so she can extend it
|
||||
to different nodes without signaling to the first few nodes (or somebody
|
||||
observing them) that she is changing her circuit. That is, nodes in the
|
||||
@ -890,31 +915,33 @@ but are still willing to read.
|
||||
|
||||
\SubSection{Integrity checking on streams}
|
||||
|
||||
In the old Onion Routing design, traffic was vulnerable to a malleability
|
||||
attack: without integrity checking, an adversary could
|
||||
guess some of the plaintext of a cell, xor it out, and xor in his own
|
||||
plaintext. Even an external adversary could do this despite the link
|
||||
encryption!
|
||||
In the old Onion Routing design, traffic was vulnerable to a
|
||||
malleability attack: an attacker could make changes to an encrypted
|
||||
cell to create corresponding changes to the data leaving the network.
|
||||
(Even an external adversary could do this, despite link encryption!)
|
||||
|
||||
For example, an adversary could change a create cell to a
|
||||
destroy cell; change the destination address in a relay begin cell
|
||||
to the adversary's webserver; or change a user on an ftp connection
|
||||
from typing ``dir'' to typing ``delete *''. Any node or observer along
|
||||
the path can introduce such corruption in a stream.
|
||||
This weakness allowed an adversary to change a create cell to a destroy
|
||||
cell; change the destination address in a relay begin cell to the
|
||||
adversary's webserver; or change a user on an ftp connection from
|
||||
typing ``dir'' to typing ``delete *''. Any node or observer along the
|
||||
path could introduce such corruption in a stream.
|
||||
|
||||
Tor solves this malleability attack with respect to external adversaries
|
||||
simply by using TLS. Addressing the insider malleability attack is more
|
||||
complex.
|
||||
Tor prevents external adversaries by mounting this attack simply by
|
||||
using TLS. Addressing the insider malleability attack, however, is
|
||||
more complex.
|
||||
|
||||
Rather than doing integrity checking of the relay cells at each hop
|
||||
(like Mixminion \cite{minion-design}), which would increase packet size
|
||||
Rather than doing integrity checking of the relay cells at each hop,
|
||||
which would increase packet size
|
||||
by a function of path length\footnote{This is also the argument against
|
||||
using recent cipher modes like EAX \cite{eax} --- we don't want the added
|
||||
message-expansion overhead at each hop, and we don't want to leak the path
|
||||
length (or pad to some max path length).}, we choose to accept passive
|
||||
timing attacks, and do integrity
|
||||
length (or pad to some max path length).}, we choose to
|
||||
% accept passive timing attacks,
|
||||
% (How? I don't get it. Do we mean end-to-end traffic
|
||||
% confirmation attacks? -NM)
|
||||
and preform integrity
|
||||
checking only at the edges of the circuit. When Alice negotiates a key
|
||||
with that hop, they both start a SHA-1 with some derivative of that key,
|
||||
with the exit hop, they both start a SHA-1 with some derivative of that key,
|
||||
thus starting out with randomness that only the two of them know. From
|
||||
then on they each incrementally add all the data bytes flowing across
|
||||
the stream to the SHA-1, and each relay cell includes the first 4 bytes
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user