Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
156 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

DarkHorse: A UDP-based Framework to Improve the Latency of Tor Onion Services (2307.02429v1)

Published 5 Jul 2023 in cs.CR and cs.NI

Abstract: Tor is the most popular anonymous communication overlay network which hides clients' identities from servers by passing packets through multiple relays. To provide anonymity to both clients and servers, Tor onion services were introduced by increasing the number of relays between a client and a server. Because of the limited bandwidth of Tor relays, large numbers of users, and multiple layers of encryption at relays, onion services suffer from high end-to-end latency and low data transfer rates, which degrade user experiences, making onion services unsuitable for latency-sensitive applications. In this paper, we present a UDP-based framework, called DarkHorse, that improves the end-to-end latency and the data transfer overhead of Tor onion services by exploiting the connectionless nature of UDP. Our evaluation results demonstrate that DarkHorse is up to 3.62x faster than regular TCP-based Tor onion services and reduces the Tor network overhead by up to 47%.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (24)
  1. D. L. Chaum, “Untraceable electronic mail, return addresses, and digital pseudonyms,” Commun. ACM, vol. 24, no. 2, p. 84–90, feb 1981. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/358549.358563
  2. C. Gulcu and G. Tsudik, “Mixing e-mail with babel,” in Proceedings of Internet Society Symposium on Network and Distributed Systems Security, 1996, pp. 2–16.
  3. G. Danezis, R. Dingledine, and N. Mathewson, “Mixminion: design of a type iii anonymous remailer protocol,” in 2003 Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2003., 2003, pp. 2–15.
  4. R. Dingledine et al., “Tor: The second-generation onion router,” Naval Research Lab Washington DC, Tech. Rep., 2004.
  5. G. Forecast, “Cisco visual networking index: global mobile data traffic forecast update, 2017–2023,” Update, vol. 2017, p. 2022, 2020.
  6. I. Sandvine, “Global internet phenomena report. 2023,” URL: https://www.sandvine.com/global-internet-phenomena-report-2023, 2023.
  7. (2003) How to make rendezvous points work. [Online]. Available: https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/commit/?id=3d538f6d702937c23bec33b3bdd62ff9fba9d2a3
  8. (2023) Tor protocol specification. [Online]. Available: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/torspec/-/blob/main/tor-spec.txt
  9. M. G. Reed, P. F. Syverson, and D. M. Goldschlag, “Anonymous connections and onion routing,” IEEE Journal on Selected areas in Communications, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 482–494, 1998.
  10. R. Dingledine and S. J. Murdoch, “Performance improvements on tor or, why tor is slow and what we’re going to do about it,” Online: http://www. torproject. org/press/presskit/2009-03-11-performance. pdf, p. 68, 2009.
  11. M. AlSabah and I. Goldberg, “Performance and security improvements for tor: A survey,” ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 1–36, 2016.
  12. M. Sherr, M. Blaze, and B. T. Loo, “Scalable link-based relay selection for anonymous routing,” in Privacy Enhancing Technologies: 9th International Symposium, PETS 2009, Seattle, WA, USA, August 5-7, 2009. Proceedings 9.   Springer, 2009, pp. 73–93.
  13. A. Panchenko and J. Renner, “Path selection metrics for performance-improved onion routing,” in 2009 Ninth Annual International Symposium on Applications and the Internet.   IEEE, 2009, pp. 114–120.
  14. K. Hogan, S. Servan-Schreiber, Z. Newman, B. Weintraub, C. Nita-Rotaru, and S. Devadas, “Shortor: Improving tor network latency via multi-hop overlay routing,” in 2022 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP).   IEEE, 2022, pp. 1933–1952.
  15. L. Yang and F. Li, “mtor: A multipath tor routing beyond bandwidth throttling,” in 2015 IEEE Conference on Communications and Network Security (CNS).   IEEE, 2015, pp. 479–487.
  16. W. De la Cadena, D. Kaiser, A. Panchenko, and T. Engel, “Out-of-the-box multipath tcp as a tor transport protocol: Performance and privacy implications,” in 2020 IEEE 19th International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications (NCA).   IEEE, 2020, pp. 1–6.
  17. S. Engler and I. Goldberg, “Weaving a faster tor: A multi-threaded relay architecture for improved throughput,” in Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security, 2021, pp. 1–11.
  18. C. Viecco, “Udp-or: A fair onion transport design,” Proceedings of Hot Topics in Privacy Enhancing Technologies (HOTPETS’08), 2008.
  19. (2022) Http/3. [Online]. Available: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9114/
  20. (2023) Tor stem library. [Online]. Available: https://stem.torproject.org/
  21. (2023) Flask web development framework. [Online]. Available: https://flask.palletsprojects.com/en/2.2.x/
  22. (2023) Scrapy framework. [Online]. Available: https://scrapy.org/
  23. F. Ali, “Ip spoofing,” The Internet Protocol Journal, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 1–9, 2007.
  24. S. Sengupta, A. Chowdhary, A. Sabur, A. Alshamrani, D. Huang, and S. Kambhampati, “A survey of moving target defenses for network security,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 1909–1941, 2020.
Citations (1)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.