[tor-dev] Can we stop sanitizing nicknames in bridge descriptors?

Karsten Loesing karsten at torproject.org
Fri May 4 16:33:25 UTC 2012

On 5/4/12 3:52 PM, Sebastian G. <bastik.tor> wrote:
> Karsten Loesing, 04.05.2012 12:31:
>> Sounds like a fine approach.  Want to do it (when the 2008 tarball is
>> available)?  It would be interesting to see a) what fraction of bridges
>> you think you can derive IP addresses for and b) how accurate your
>> guesses are.
> Since it will be released in two weeks and the next wave is released in
> two weeks after that I think there's enough time in which I can do that.


> When you think it's useful I'm at least going to try. We should take
> this "off list" and then can post the results on it.

Let's only discuss things off-list to reduce the potential noise for
others, but let's post all results directly to the list.  If you come up
with guesses which bridges in 2008 were located nearby which relays,
that's entirely based on (then) publicly available information.  My
response will be of the sort "you found x% of the bridges" which is fine
to post to the list, too.  This is why we're trying this with the 2008
bridges first before making the more recent tarballs available.  And
even then, it's good to find issues before we have 50,000 bridges in the

> I encourage anyone to try the same. It might be interesting to see
> different results (What's similar). In the case that's useful.


I encourage anyone to find issues in the sanitized bridge descriptor
tarballs at any time, not restricted to this specific discussion.
Knowing that there's a potential problem is great, because then we can
fix it.  So far I was the only one finding and fixing problems.  Maybe
others did find them, too, but didn't tell anyone.


More information about the tor-dev mailing list