[tor-dev] Contents of tor-dev digest...
mike at mikeguidry.net
Mon Apr 10 21:54:17 UTC 2017
I'm not presenting a scientific paper. Its an actual method that works.
You can DDoS various networks to compare against active connections on TOR,
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:22 PM, dawuud <dawuud at riseup.net> wrote:
> Dear Mike Guidry,
> My reply here is snarky but I just cannot help it. Please consider me
> a friend that is snarky rather than an enemy or an asshole.
> I am finding it very hard to read. It is *extremely* annoying that you
> present your definition of "hacking" at the beginning and then go on to
> define TCP, UDP and other irrelavent things. it also buzzes and pops with
> wtf terms like "reflect lateral hacking movements". Is your target audience
> journalists who won't know what to look for in a good technical write up
> of an actual attack?
> Perhaps it would be helpful for you to review some of the vast academic
> about breaking Tor since you are interested in breaking Tor:
> David Stainton
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:17:13AM -0400, Mike Guidry wrote:
> > I am not trolling you. I attached a PDF which explains how to trace TOR
> > connections over the internet. It is not a joke. I have some other
> > vulnerabilities at that URL I am releasing.
> > I'll include here:
> > Michael Guidry March 15, 2017
> > Tracing connections online from the virtual landscape to the physical
> > Hacking is the intrusion of a computer by an unwanted guest, and is
> > used to express gaining access to corporate, or government networks. It
> > requires either installing using malware, phishing, or directly
> > to machines and attacking their software with exploits. It is currently
> > impossible to accurately trace hackers online unless they use the same
> > software, and techniques for all their targets. It has become a major
> > problem within the last decade due to globalization, and corporate
> > directly connected to the Internet.
> > Tracing Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) connections across the
> > is inaccurate due to how routing is performed across global backbones.
> > global routing table is modified constantly with nodes, and routes being
> > adjusted for optimization, or quality of service needs. TCP is the most
> > used protocol therefore it is the only protocol which really matters to
> > attempt to trace. User Datagram Protocol (UDP) is state less therefore
> > reliable for tracking, however has the same vulnerability. UDP is usually
> > used by hackers for exfiltration, or remote control after other actions
> > have been performed.
> > It is currently impossible to track connections over the Internet
> > accurately. Several cases relate to The Onion Router (TOR) sites aka
> > Web,” which were somehow uncovered using private technologies.
> > used for those cases do not work properly over regular hacking via
> > online. Its an issue for the landscape of political hacking worldwide
> > has been increasing annually across the globe.
> > China, for example, has been having a lot of blame lately due to Internet
> > Protocol (IP) addresses assigned within its borders being used in massive
> > amounts of attacks. Some of these attacks have been supposedly verified,
> > however it is impossible for China to have performed them all. Proxy
> > servers being used in chains may just be victims themselves. The problem
> > arises due to possible evidence planting being similar to proxying
> > their others networks, or borders. It is completely different comparing
> > cyber war to traditional conflicts due to evidence being traceable, and
> > soldiers physical evidence being easily recovered.
> > Hacking back is a concept any government, or corporation is now detailing
> > within their playbook to understand how the liabilities may affect them.
> > is the terminology used to attack the source of an intrusion by means of
> > hacking itself. Repercussions of hacking a country due to incorrectly
> > assuming an attack was originating there is highly possible. Cyber war
> > policies exists for a lot of nations, and it may easily escalate their
> > attention on whom they believe is performing the attacks. The same
> > with ‘proxy wars’ currently within the middle east, etc. Proxy wars
> > traditionally will have global evidence allowing verification of weapon
> > deliveries, or monetary exchanges to determine the origin of funding.
> > Soldiers training methods, and other strategies may be impossible to
> > It is generally accepted once verified, and escalation is directed
> > the proper perpetrator.
> > Internet Service Providers (ISP) have the ability to perform various
> > internally to determine the pathways through their networks which would
> > reflect lateral hacking movements. Connections leaving a single network
> > that enter the realm of dynamic routing via Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)
> > become a nightmare. The percentage of accuracy decreases
> > exponentially as each separate network is used to route the connection to
> > its destination. It becomes nearly impossible to trace after just a few
> > gateways at least publicly, or academically.
> > Unorthodox methods are required to allow tracing of connections under
> > circumstances. Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) is a solution that
> > allows you to turn the internet’s own packet distribution system into a
> > tracking mechanism. Most people do not consider performing DDoS attacks
> > positive reasons. DDoS may have been used by targets to “quarantine”
> > hacking source temporarily from the Internet. This strategy is beyond the
> > scope of this technique, and is literally only a bandaid for a single
> > attack originating from possibly just a proxy.
> > DDoS is also illegal in most nations which have advanced their cyber
> > laws. The fact that this technique requires many computers performing
> > attacks strategically placed across the globe also ensures that they will
> > be performed from countries where these laws are being enforced. The
> > requires attacking all networks that you wish to verify against therefore
> > you are immediately breaking laws on the destination side of most of the
> > world simultaneously. It should not be used lightly, or regularly without
> > cause and understanding.
> > DDoS attacks transmit more data to a destination than a that network can
> > handle which forces it to stop responding in a timely fashion. The
> > is so high that the TCP timeouts are reached, and connections break. New
> > connections are also impossible during these attacks. It has only had
> > negative effects since it began being used globally regularly. This
> > technique could be considered a reverse DDoS.
> > The approach is to attack the entire world in a very strategically timed
> > manner using worldwide machines. Each separate DDoS attack using machines
> > worldwide would use different synchronization, and timing information
> > would allow embedding information directly into the latency it causes on
> > those networks. The purpose is to compare that latency with the hack
> > place to verify its source location. If the attack disrupts networks your
> > attempting to verify against for milliseconds up to a few seconds then
> > can perform several of these sequentially to embed information in this
> > timing itself. DDoS then becomes a positive useful solution even though
> > technically illegal to a currently difficult problem.
> > You wouldn’t necessarily have to attack the entire world. Conceptually it
> > would be better to use databases of networks wishing to verify against.
> > Residential, and commercial IP delegations throughout most nations would
> > cover a large portion. Government hacking groups have their IPs leaked
> > often as well. It is possible to just perform the attacks on these
> > particular sets of IP addresses rather than the world as a whole. It is
> > also equally possible to perform the attacks on entire ISPs, and
> > to quickly determine although this would not be accurate due to possible
> > proxies in between being within that country.
> > If the technique is used on a major ISP network rather than a gateway
> > into an office then it is possible that a proxy exists within their
> > which would read off as a false positive. Accuracy relies on the networks
> > your verifying against to be actual end user machines which would have
> > human attackers. If you were to attack a network, or router of a network
> > which has an office then it is highly likely they are going to notice
> > hackers using their network to hack externally on scales which would
> > involve this type of solution. If you were to attack an entire country
> > you are going to have a problem of not recognizing from timing alone
> > whether or not a proxy (of possibly several) just exist in that country.
> > is imperative to understand this, and always attempt to get as close to
> > networks in question being verified.
> > Original message:
> > Are you trolling us? I don't get it!
> > On Sun, Apr 09, 2017 at 08:19:28PM -0400, Mike Guidry wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Here is a document I've wrote regarding a concept to trace connections
> > even
> > > through TOR. If you have any questions feel free to respond, and I'll
> > > attempt to explain. I have also considered a way to mitigate this
> > > situation being allowing TOR to be traced by using 'Transactional
> > > Requests.' I'll proceed to write it up, and post soon.
> > >
> > > I have released some other short papers as well. It contains several
> > files
> > > regarding a few vulnerabilities, and a couple concepts regarding things
> > > like quantum resistant cryptography, etc..
> > >
> > > URL: https://mega.nz/#F!QnZRXKyS!oluyILlMPpyJjPS57w7axQ
> > >
> > > Feel free to e-mail me directly..
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mike Guidry
> > _______________________________________________
> > tor-dev mailing list
> > tor-dev at lists.torproject.org
> > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
> tor-dev mailing list
> tor-dev at lists.torproject.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tor-dev