[cryptography] Potential funding for crypto-related projects

aortega at alu.itba.edu.ar aortega at alu.itba.edu.ar
Tue Jul 2 03:54:56 EDT 2013

>> The more interesting point is high vs low latency. I really like the
>> idea of having a high-latency option in Tor. It would still need to
>> have a lot of users to actually be useful, though. But it seems there
>> are various protocols that would be ore high-latency-friendly than
>> HTTP - SMTP, of course, and XMPP spring to mind.
> I think if Tor had an arbitrary queue with store and forward as a high
> latency module of sorts, we'd really be onto something. Then there would
> be tons of traffic on the Tor relays for all kinds of reasons - high and
> low latency - only to all be wrapped in TLS and then in the Tor protocol.

I was looking for something like this. It would be incompatible with
anything that uses TCP, but better that way. I have always found weird
that there is no a UDP-like transport in tor.

IMHO only the TCP initial hand-shake gives your attacker enough info to
leak your position easily (just a tought, never did any sort of serious
tests on this) but UDP would be immune to it, even more if it's
implemented using high-latency queues. Probably most existing UDP services
should work unmodified.

Best regards,


More information about the cryptography mailing list