[tor-bugs] #12777 [meek]: Decide how to handle multiple meek backends in Tor Launcher

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#12777: Decide how to handle multiple meek backends in Tor Launcher
------------------------+----------------------------------
     Reporter:  dcf     |      Owner:  dcf
         Type:  defect  |     Status:  needs_review
     Priority:  normal  |  Milestone:
    Component:  meek    |    Version:
   Resolution:          |   Keywords:  TorBrowserTeam201408
Actual Points:          |  Parent ID:
       Points:          |
------------------------+----------------------------------

Comment (by asn):

 Replying to [comment:1 dcf]:
 > What I'm worried about is a user looking at this list of weird names and
 not knowing which to pick. Adding more meeks isn't going to help things.
 >

 Yes, this is the problem...

 However, I wonder if the two extra meeks make it that worse. I mean, as
 long as there is a recommended PT (in this case obfs3), I think that's
 what most users will try, and only if that fails they will try the other
 "weird" options.

 Maybe changing it to `meek over Amazon` and `meek over Google` will make
 it more obvious? I think we can use whitespace as normal.

 Also, instead of ordering the elements alphabetically, maybe it would be
 better to put obfs3 on top (since it's recommended). Then put fte, and
 then meek and finally flashproxy? I'm suggesting this because putting
 obfs3 on top might be more intuitive to users, and also because that's the
 order I would probably want to try my transports if I was censored.

 > Maybe we ship one default and return other backends through BridgeDB?

 Yes, that could also be an option. But which one? We only have 50GB for
 free in cloudfront, and google is blocked in China.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12777#comment:2>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online