Hi,
I’ve been running a bridge for over a year and noticed recently that the fingerprint shown in ARM (and that actually works when connecting to the bridge) differs from the fingerprint displayed for my bridge on both Atlas and Globe. Any thoughts on why this would happen and how to fix it? I’m assuming the fingerprint published on Atlas & Globe is the same fingerprint that will be distributed by bridges.torproject, is that correct?
Apologies if this is a common question… I’ve only recently joined the mailing list and couldn’t find a way to search the archives other than browsing.
Regards,
-Pat
18.01.2015, 19:02 Patrick Scharmer:
Hi,
Hi,
I’ve been running a bridge for over a year and noticed recently that the fingerprint shown in ARM (and that actually works when connecting to the bridge) differs from the fingerprint displayed for my bridge on both Atlas and Globe. Any thoughts on why this would happen and how to fix it? I’m assuming the fingerprint published on Atlas & Globe is the same fingerprint that will be distributed by bridges.torproject, is that correct?
The fingerprint you see in Globe and Atlas is the SHA-1 hash of the bridge fingerprint.
Apologies if this is a common question… I’ve only recently joined the mailing list and couldn’t find a way to search the archives other than browsing.
There used to be a document describing the sanitization process of bridge data, but since the remake of metrics.torproject.org it is not linked from there anymore, I don't know if it still exists.
Anyone one of the sanitizations is to not publish the bridges fingerprint. Instead a SHA-1 hash of the fingerprint.
Karsten definitely knows much more about this.
Regards,
-Pat
Regards, Sebastian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 18/01/15 19:02, Patrick Scharmer wrote:
Hi,
I’ve been running a bridge for over a year and noticed recently that the fingerprint shown in ARM (and that actually works when connecting to the bridge) differs from the fingerprint displayed for my bridge on both Atlas and Globe. Any thoughts on why this would happen and how to fix it? I’m assuming the fingerprint published on Atlas & Globe is the same fingerprint that will be distributed by bridges.torproject, is that correct?
arm displays your bridge's fingerprint, which is also distributed by bridges.torproject.org.
Atlas and Globe show your bridge's *hashed* fingerprint. The reason that they're not showing the (non-hashed) fingerprint is that anyone could ask the bridge authority for your bridge's current descriptor if they had its (non-hashed) fingerprint, and that would reveal your bridge's IP address. That's why Atlas and Globe hash your fingerprint.
Apologies if this is a common question… I’ve only recently joined the mailing list and couldn’t find a way to search the archives other than browsing.
It's a valid question. If you have any ideas how to explain it better on Atlas or Globe, please open a ticket. Thanks!
All the best, Karsten
Thanks all for your replies… this helps. Makes sense why the non-hashed fingerprint isn’t shown.
Glad to know I was just misunderstanding the info on Globe/Atlas. I was worried there was something wrong with my node.
-Pat
On Jan 19, 2015, at 1:39 AM, Karsten Loesing karsten@torproject.org wrote:
Signed PGP part On 18/01/15 19:02, Patrick Scharmer wrote:
Hi,
I’ve been running a bridge for over a year and noticed recently that the fingerprint shown in ARM (and that actually works when connecting to the bridge) differs from the fingerprint displayed for my bridge on both Atlas and Globe. Any thoughts on why this would happen and how to fix it? I’m assuming the fingerprint published on Atlas & Globe is the same fingerprint that will be distributed by bridges.torproject, is that correct?
arm displays your bridge's fingerprint, which is also distributed by bridges.torproject.org.
Atlas and Globe show your bridge's *hashed* fingerprint. The reason that they're not showing the (non-hashed) fingerprint is that anyone could ask the bridge authority for your bridge's current descriptor if they had its (non-hashed) fingerprint, and that would reveal your bridge's IP address. That's why Atlas and Globe hash your fingerprint.
Apologies if this is a common question… I’ve only recently joined the mailing list and couldn’t find a way to search the archives other than browsing.
It's a valid question. If you have any ideas how to explain it better on Atlas or Globe, please open a ticket. Thanks!
All the best, Karsten
tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
You can use the "site:" prefix with our friends at google, eg. "site: https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/ SEARCHTERM" On 18 Jan 2015 19:02, "Patrick Scharmer" pat@scharmer.net wrote:
Hi,
I’ve been running a bridge for over a year and noticed recently that the fingerprint shown in ARM (and that actually works when connecting to the bridge) differs from the fingerprint displayed for my bridge on both Atlas and Globe. Any thoughts on why this would happen and how to fix it? I’m assuming the fingerprint published on Atlas & Globe is the same fingerprint that will be distributed by bridges.torproject, is that correct?
Apologies if this is a common question… I’ve only recently joined the mailing list and couldn’t find a way to search the archives other than browsing.
Regards,
-Pat
tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
-
Karsten Loesing -
Patrick Scharmer -
Sebastian G. <bastik.tor> -
usprey