Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | MzxgckZtNqX5i's commentslogin

Relays can be malicious and try to tamper with the data. Think of Tor relay encryption like Signal's E2E encryption, where the relays are analogous to Signal's servers. You want to ensure they can neither see what you sent (confidentiality) nor modify it without detection (integrity).

Yes, but if it's all encrypted tunnels inside encrypted tunnels (recursively), then those relays can't really see the data, right?

That is correct. But, (in general) encryption does not necessarily guarantees integrity of the data. In other words, a plaintext can be encrypted, the ciphertext given to another party, and they can tamper with the ciphertext in a way that produces predictable changes in the message obtained by decrypting the tampered ciphertext.

Ok, but if I run (say) HTTPS over the innermost tunnel, then I suppose that HTTPS will take care of any discrepancies.

The malleability of the ciphertext matters because it enables certain circuit tagging attacks as the article explains. It means that the exit relay could confirm you are using a guard relay also controlled by them and thus discover your origin IP address.

There are many reasons that these cryptographic tagging attacks are a lot worse than just the timing correlation attacks that are possible if you control the guard and exit of a client: https://archive.torproject.org/websites/lists.torproject.org...


You can indeed use HTTPS with the end server (e.g., accessing Wikipedia). This correctly hides the traffic content from all relays.

To reach this point, though, you first need to set up the Tor circuit itself. This is done in a 'telescopic' fashion: the user connects via TLS to the first relay, then sends a message to extend the circuit to a second relay, then to the third (and usually last) relay. Finally, to open Wikipedia, you send a layered encrypted message to the last relay. All this data is link-protected by TLS on the wire, but protected by Tor's relay encryption mechanism while being processed by the nodes.


I 100% agree with you, but it looks like that specific, single instance is a clear example of the famous broken clock being right twice a day.


Not uncommon in Norway, at least at few gyms I've been to after they reopened after COVID.


As someone who moved to Norway (not Oslo) to pursue a PhD in computer science, I highly suggest everyone who might be interested to give it a chance. High quality of life and supportive system and society. Vacancies for University of Bergen: https://www.uib.no/en/about/84777/vacant-positions-uib.


> University of Bergen

Don't forget to bring your rain gear!


Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1168/.


To be fair `tar` is quite easy to use once you understand the grammar of the options.


Towards the bottom, it states:

  It turns out that the Pacific Time Zone is the only one where the bug caused a user visible difference because:

    1. Daylight saving time starting or ending changes the time zone offset by just one hour.
    2. The bug only has an effect when the difference in the number of hours goes from less than a day to at least a day, or vice versa (e.g. 23 to 24 or 24 to 23).

  The only hour of the day that satisfies those two conditions is 11:00pm, and the only time zone where daylight saving time starts and ends at 11:00pm is the Pacific Time Zone.


The article may state it, but it's not true. US DST starts and ends at 2am in every time zone. It doesn't start at 2am in the east, 1 central, 12 west, 11 pacific.


While it might not provide a direct answer to your question, this paper could be an interesting read: https://eprint.iacr.org/2021/1624.


No, the critic was only that "Veganism in the form of religion that thou must not deviate from" is counterproductive in getting people to eat less meat.


To me it reads veganism in the form that the individual practicing it does not deviate from it, nothing about telling others how to eat. How is the existence of those people counterproductive to people eating less meat?


"Veganism in the form of religion that thou must not deviate from" is entirely counterproductive because it tries to get people to completely stop eating meat. Large majority of the population doesn't want that so they continue with the same meat consumption, while we could eat less meat that we currently do without giving up on some BBQ/steaks here and there. It creates a false dichotomy, putting people on the defensive because they don't want to give up meat.


This is such a braindead take.


A similar thing happened/is happening in Europe, as a lot of non-native speakers interact with each other: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euro_English.


"Articles" on arXiv are not peer-reviewed, they just check whether it looks like it belongs to one of the categories they hosts:

"Registered users may submit articles to be announced by arXiv. There are no fees or costs for article submission. Submissions to arXiv are subject to a moderation process that classifies material as topical to the subject area and checks for scholarly value. Material is not peer-reviewed by arXiv - the contents of arXiv submissions are wholly the responsibility of the submitter and are presented “as is” without any warranty or guarantee." [0]

They are commonly known as pre-prints, in a similar fashion to IACR ePrint [1] for cryptography.

[0]: https://info.arxiv.org/about/index.html

[1]: https://eprint.iacr.org/


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: