[tor-bugs] #9387 [Tor Launcher]: Tor Launcher/Torbutton should provide a "Security Slider"

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#9387: Tor Launcher/Torbutton should provide a "Security Slider"
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
     Reporter:           |      Owner:  gk
  mikeperry              |     Status:  new
         Type:           |  Milestone:
  enhancement            |    Version:
     Priority:  major    |   Keywords:  TorBrowserTeam201410D, tbb-
    Component:  Tor      |  security, tbb-usability, tbb-linkability,
  Launcher               |  tbb-3.0, extdev-interview, tbb-isec-report,
   Resolution:           |  tbb-4.5-alpha
Actual Points:           |  Parent ID:
       Points:           |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Comment (by SpencerOne):

 Hey y'all, here are some of my thoughts.  I used my own terms here, made
 up on the spot, but please make me use yours if mine complicate the
 discussion.

 After reading the ongoing discussion, here are my two Satoshi:

 1. Splitting the JavaScript allowances between allowance setting positions
 on the slider could be confusing for people.  It requires explaining what
 JavaScript is and what it does in detail, that is, presuming that
 explaining the settings is necessary, and I think we are on the same page
 in thinking that it is.  Alternatively, we can not explain the settings in
 detail, though that leaves people unclear as to what is actually
 happening, e.g., some JS is disabled/all JS is disabled, doesn't explain
 much.

 2. However, whatever the number of allowance settings, and four seems to
 be the path forward from here, the details [what the user sees] should be
 written in human, not computer.  Though maybe that could be toggled.

 3. Regarding a 'Custom' allowance setting on the slider itself, that makes
 things a bit confusing.  The slider should be the foremost front-end
 allowance settings option, inherently likening 'Custom' to 'Advanced', as
 a deeper option.

 4. I agree that the allowance settings interface during install should be
 the allowance settings interface in Preferences, as an attempt to lessen
 visual and mental fragmentation.

 5. The tool tips for allowance setting positions are cool, but are hidden
 for most people.  The always-on text is better for full understanding of
 options/decisions, but takes up space.  The always-on text that is only
 visible at each allowance setting position fits in the middle of these two
 options but requires work, clicking and whatnot.  Maybe, in addition to
 this middle option, the other unselected allowance setting positions
 appear on hover, or in place, of the always-on text.


 After reviewing TB 4.5 Alpha 2 [Mac]:

 1. Setting security preferences could be a prompt in the second dialog,
 considering the first is the drag-to install dialog. I see benefit in not
 forcing people to make such decisions right away, but people are using TB
 for a reason, so maybe it can be expected.

 2. 'Cookie Protections' seems like a preference.  What is cookie
 protection, IDK, so maybe this is an advanced setting.

 3. 'Proxy Settings' could be second after 'Privacy and Security Settings',
 however, 'Proxy Settings' seems like an advanced setting, maybe
 simplifying the experience for many people.

 4. 'Privacy Settings' and 'Security Level' could use some explaining.  I
 would like to think that I am securing my data with the security settings,
 or, in other words, securing my privacy. Semantics could be important
 here.  Are we only securing our anonymity?

 5. I am all for the vertical slider, given the difficulty of containing
 varying lengths in allowance setting position labels.  We could move
 allowance setting position labels to the left of the slider with
 descriptions to the right.  If we're only showing the current/selected
 allowance setting position description, this provides plenty of space for
 a more detailed explanation.


 Questions:

 1. Is there a visual flow of the dialogs and what they contain, or is it
 all in development text archives?

 2. Is there an outlet for visuals, like wireframes?

 3. Does there have to be a "tradeoff between features and security"? It is
 a big bite to take, but, can alternatives be written as stand-ins to
 replace the vulnerable features?

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/9387#comment:71>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online