[tor-dev] onionoo: bug in family set detection?
teor2345 at gmail.com
Tue Jun 2 15:44:42 UTC 2015
> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2015 19:20:32 +0000
> From: nusenu <nusenu at openmailbox.org>
> by comparing different methodologies of "parsing" myfamily data I
> stumbled upon differences between onionoo and compass.
> After manual review I assume there is a bug in onionoo (or onionoo has
> a different opinion on what families actually are)
> According to onionoo, torpidsDEevanzo  is part of a family with 38
> It lists torpidsFRonline  as one of its members, that implies that
> torpidsFRonline lists torpidsDEevanzo as one of its members as well,
> but torpidsDEevanzo does _not_ list torpidsFRonline (according to
> onionoo data).
> grep 'fingerprint":"0C77421C890D16B6D201283A2' details.json|grep
> (no result)
> Is this a bug?
No, it's a feature :-)
MyFamily requires bidirectional declarations to be effective. This prevents a malicious relay nominating significant portions of the Tor network as its family, in order to direct traffic to another malicious relay. (And/or slowing down the network and attempting to cause a DoS.)
In this case:
torpids relays have inconsistent MyFamily configurations.
OnionOO appears to correctly implement the bidirectional MyFamily logic, and remove inconsistent one-way MyFamily declarations.
Compass appears to believe each relay's MyFamily claims, without checking the other relay. This appears to be a fairly harmless bug in Compass, as Compass itself is not used for path selection.
teor2345 at gmail dot com
teor at blah dot im
OTR D5BE4EC2 255D7585 F3874930 DB130265 7C9EBBC7
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
More information about the tor-dev