[tor-talk] Torbutton-birdy version 0.0.2
mikeperry at torproject.org
Sun May 27 22:32:24 UTC 2012
Thus spake tagnaq (tagnaq at gmail.com):
> > Wouldn't this (or some of the other header settings) allow the
> > recipient or general public (if a mailing list post) to learn that
> > a person was using TorBirdy?
> I don't think that Sukhbir and Jake aim for an undetectable TorBirdy,
> but as soon as another email client has also an extension like
> TorBirdy and agrees on the same header field settings I guess it
> wouldn't be easy to determine the client in use by looking at the
> header. The MSA would very likely still have the "power" to determine
> the client (version).
> > I hate to say it, but "What's the threat model?"
> My thread model is described on page 6 of the following paper:
This is an awesome doc.
Is this sourced from latex? Is it possible to output an html version
I find the pdf format heavy and unnerving from a security perspective..
> > Is that important? It seems like it would be. As an example, go
> > through this thread, and see whose reply header is of the form "On
> > X, Y wrote:" and now you know who's not running the latest
> > version.
> I'd consider it as important to have all torbirdy "stable" users in
> one anonymity set as soon as there is a feature complete stable
> version. I consider the current version as experimental.
Hrmm. Actually, if we can avoid revealing this anonymity set explicitly
to mailing lists and recipients, I think that might be a worthy goal.
The primary reason we don't bother with it on Tor Browser is because tor
exits are meant to be discoverable (with a useful secondary reason being
to take Mozilla to school). Since Tor IPs are often absent from mailing
list headers if the SMTP server(s) are not run by a total jerk, can we
figure out a way to look more common?
What's wrong with using the Thunderbird default locale string for the
quotation here? If you're posting on a mailing list where discussion
occurs in only one human language, shouldn't you be using that same
localization for mail client? For multilingual users, can we solve that
problem a different way, perhaps by a localization dropdown menu or
I agree this is a tricky issue.. I could see this choice a few different
ways. I just want to make sure we don't unnecessarily explicitly expose
the user agent to a mailing list unless we really have to.
Doing so can lead to targeted attacks...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the tor-talk