Not immediately, but I feel that as those protocols become more ubiquitous, _maybe_ the base Tor transport protocol (for nodes which aren't bridges) might be able to benefit from some of the same upgrades by using them? I was getting ~36 subflows per tcp connection. Using MPTCP, I managed ~50 Mbps throughput for bbcp transfers between onion sites (with gigabit uplinks).
Especially for onion sites, where precious exit relays aren't needed. Increased investment in high-bandwidth relays would help a lot.Īlso, with more relays, it would be workable to implement multipath circuits. The Tor client does pick faster relays, but there's a tradeoff, in that doing so reduces anonymity. But also, many relays have low-bandwidth uplinks, especially ones that people run at home. However, sites can opt for one-relay circuits, sacrificing anonymity, so overall rtt isn't that bad.īandwidth is also reduced with Tor. With traditional onion sites, there are two three-relay circuits, one for the user and one for the site, plus a rendezvous relay. Because it reduces the accuracy of traffic analysis. But latency is actually good if your goal is anonymity. In practice, rtt for Tor is at most half that, and often even less. So with four hops, rtt would at most be 1200-2000 msec, if every hop were the maximum length. It's only ~130 msec at lightspeed, but there are some copper links, plus switching time and caching. And rtt for that would be about 300-500 msec, according to my measurements. So the longest path is arguably ~20 thousand km. The Earth's circumference is about 40 thousand km. So there are four hops between users and websites, instead of one. For traffic to the open Internet, traffic uses circuits through three relays: entry guard, middle and exit.
But yes, Tor introduces latency and reduces bandwidth. This would be a privacy option for Firefox, not the default.
0 kommentar(er)
