Live data from Hacker News

“Two days ago the police came to me and wanted me to stop working on this”

github.com

51–60 of 559 posts

Re: “Two days ago the police came to me and wanted me to stop working on this”

#51
post #40

For people who are not aware of this: Shadowsocks is a popular and very simple tool to circumvent Great Fire Wall in China. It is written to reduce characteristics in network traffic so that GFW cannot easily block it by deep traffic analysis. clowwindy is the original author.

Who is the target audience of this software and how does it work? Do non technical users set this up on a VPS provider and then connect to it? I'd imagine most developers in China would just SSH tunnel their way out.

SSH tunnel is just too easy for the GFW to detect, it's so unstable that you cannot even browse the web with it.

Yes, setting up a VPS provider would be the most common way. There are Shadowsocks implementations that supports multiple users so that more than one person can use it simultaneously. There are also commercial solutions for Shadowsocks that you can just purchase an account instead of setting up your own server.

Re: “Two days ago the police came to me and wanted me to stop working on this”

#52
post #40

For people who are not aware of this: Shadowsocks is a popular and very simple tool to circumvent Great Fire Wall in China. It is written to reduce characteristics in network traffic so that GFW cannot easily block it by deep traffic analysis. clowwindy is the original author.

Who is the target audience of this software and how does it work? Do non technical users set this up on a VPS provider and then connect to it? I'd imagine most developers in China would just SSH tunnel their way out.

SSH still work, but it's not designed to give a high throughput, so ideally one would not want to watch a youtube clip over SSH. And DPI can identify and kill SSH session when there are too much traffic happening over it (ie. no obfuscation is taking place to hide SSH traffic)

Re: “Two days ago the police came to me and wanted me to stop working on this”

#53
> I hope one day I'll live in a country where I have freedom to write any code I like without fearing.

Can the author reach the US by whatever mean and apply for political asylum? That 'fear that they will suffer persecution due to: ... Political opinion'[0] seems legit.

[0] http://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/asylum

Re: “Two days ago the police came to me and wanted me to stop working on this”

#54
I was visiting China recently (my first time there). I thought bypassing The Great Firewall was going to be as simple as an "ssh -D" SOCKS setup, or a "ssh -w" tunnel. Oh boy, I was wrong. If you try this, or even a basic OpenVPN setup, you will quickly find out your VPN works fine for about 5 minutes, but then latency increases to 5sec, 10sec, 30sec(!), and then everything times out. After some research I read online the government does deep packet analysis and uses machine learning to find heuristics to guess which TCP connection or UDP stream is likely being used as a VPN. When they think there is a high probability a VPN is detected, they simply start dropping all the packets.

Encryption is not enough. You need to disguise your VPN traffic to make it look like standard HTTPS sessions (since they don't block HTTPS). For example in a traditional HTTPS session, if the client browser downloads, say, a 500kB image over HTTPS, it will send periodical empty TCP ACK packets as it receives the data. But when using a VPN that encrypts data at the IP layer, these empty ACK packets will be encrypted, so The Great Firewall will see the client sending small ~80-120 bytes encrypted packets, and will count this as one more sign that this might be a VPN.

That's why people in China have to use VPN tools that most westerners have never heard of: obfsproxy, ShadowVPN, SoftEther, gohop, etc. All these tools try to obfuscate and hide VPNs. I have a lot of respect for all these Chinese hackers like clowwindy who try to escape censorship, as it takes more technical prowess than you think to design a VPN that works in China.

Re: “Two days ago the police came to me and wanted me to stop working on this”

#55
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the result of a recent change in OS X 10.11, called System Integrity Protection. It's a big step in the wrong direction [opinion], especially because it does nothing to verify "integrity". It prevents changes to the System directory by conventional means (and injection into system processes). If malware were to figure out a way to disable SIP from userland, it could install itself in such a way that nothing s…

How do SIP and dtrace interact?

From https://developer.apple.com/videos/wwdc/2015/?id=706

"all dtrace probes that target a system restricted process will not be matched" (i.e. will fail unless SIP is disabled).

Re: “Two days ago the police came to me and wanted me to stop working on this”

#56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does booting an alternate OS still work to get around it, or have Apple thought of that route and somehow blocked it too? (I have limited experience with OS X - only briefly played around with driver development and bootloaders in the 10.4 era with osx86 - and I did have to boot from the DVD a few times when I made the system unbootable.) This raises the question, what good is root if it's not really root anymore?

> Does booting an alternate OS still work to get around it, or have Apple thought of that route and somehow blocked it too? It's easier than that. It's just a kernel argument to disable it. Simply add "rootless=0" to your boot-args and you have control of your machine back. I'm running the 10.11 beta and I've already had to disable rootless because I like to have /usr/local as a symlink to somewhere else and by defau…

Apple has stated that the "rootless=0" boot argument to disable System Integrity Protection is temporary and will be gone in the GM version of El Capitan. Allowing this route to disable the feature would defeat the entire purpose of it.

Re: “Two days ago the police came to me and wanted me to stop working on this”

#57
https://github.com/Long-live-shadowsocks/shadowsocks

The original repositories have been/are being reset. (Some branches were not removed.)

Non-obvious ways to search for forks as the network graph is unavailable for larger projects.

https://github.com/search?utf8=&q=shadowsocks+language%3APyt...

Re: “Two days ago the police came to me and wanted me to stop working on this”

#58
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is the target audience of this software and how does it work? Do non technical users set this up on a VPS provider and then connect to it? I'd imagine most developers in China would just SSH tunnel their way out.

SSH dynamic port forwarding is no longer working for years. It is so easily picked up by GFW and minutes later it is gone together with the whole SSH connection. So does PPTP and L2TP VPN. GFW has been upgraded so many times for the past few years. The target audience is developers. The install is super simple via one line of `pip install`, the start code for daemon is also one line with the configuration inline or t…

[deleted]

Re: “Two days ago the police came to me and wanted me to stop working on this”

#59
post #49

I find this comment amazing: https://github.com/shadowsocks/shadowsocks-iOS/issues/124#is... Even with root account, you are not in full control of your Mac - you are sandboxed by Apple.

This is an iOS app, not a Mac app.

Yes, but from the same commenter earlier: "I want to try this api on MAC OS 10.11. I understand the reason why I need to ask apple for some permission to publish the app with this api to app store, but I can't believe that I have to ask them for permission to run this api on my development machine."

Re: “Two days ago the police came to me and wanted me to stop working on this”

#60
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the result of a recent change in OS X 10.11, called System Integrity Protection. It's a big step in the wrong direction [opinion], especially because it does nothing to verify "integrity". It prevents changes to the System directory by conventional means (and injection into system processes). If malware were to figure out a way to disable SIP from userland, it could install itself in such a way that nothing s…

But that's the thing, you can't disable SIP from userland. It can only be disabled when booted into recovery mode. So yes, it absolutely does verify integrity, because it makes it so malware cannot embed itself into the system. Your last sentence there is 100% pure grade A FUD. You may as well just say "every security measure is bullshit, because if malware were to figure a way around it, then it wouldn't work". It's…

It's a boot argument to the kernel, stored in NVRAM. These arguments are normally mutable. Apple had to write code to prevent modifying said arguments. Said code can have flaws.

But lets say you don't find a vulnerability in SIP userland detection, and instead find a kernel exploit to get around the protection:

If malware were to figure a way around it, then even antivirus software can't uninstall it. Only Apple can. It's not FUD.

Post reply on HN