Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The FBI Used the Web’s Favorite Hacking Tool to Unmask Tor Users

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 58 posts

Re: The FBI Used the Web’s Favorite Hacking Tool to Unmask Tor Users

#21

Post by zaphar »

ultramancool wrote: post #10
Sniperfish wrote: post #2

Nothing within that suggests Tor has been cracked but highlights that enforcement agencies do not need to crack Tor if other elements of the infrastructure (Flash, Firefox) have vulnerabilities.

There are of course simple ways around that sort of issue. You can create a 2 VM system: - proxy VM - 2 NICs, one public, one internal to VMs only, runs Tor, exposes only Tor SOCKS5 port to internal network, firewalls everything else - main VM - 1 NIC, internal only, connects only to other VM on Tor SOCKS5 port. Preventing any application from being able to connect. This VM needs to be somewhat locked down from the h…

Simple for me. Simple for you. Not simple for a lot of the people using Tor.

Simple is many times a relative term.

Re: The FBI Used the Web’s Favorite Hacking Tool to Unmask Tor Users

#22

Post by wcbeard10 »

rday wrote: post #20

> Like any encryption or privacy system, Tor is popular with criminals. Out of curiosity, what is the bar for "popular"? Are the majority of criminals using Tor? I expect Public Defenders are much more popular with criminals. I also expect saying "Public Defenders are popular with criminals" would sound like I'm trying to discredit those people...

I can't think of a measure for "popular with criminals" that wouldn't also include the FBI's purported tool of choice.

Re: The FBI Used the Web’s Favorite Hacking Tool to Unmask Tor Users

#23

Post by cbd1984 »

rday wrote: post #20

> Like any encryption or privacy system, Tor is popular with criminals. Out of curiosity, what is the bar for "popular"? Are the majority of criminals using Tor? I expect Public Defenders are much more popular with criminals. I also expect saying "Public Defenders are popular with criminals" would sound like I'm trying to discredit those people...

You know what else is popular with criminals?

Walls.

Mailing using envelopes instead of postcards, especially those envelopes with the ink patterns that make it harder to see through them.

Not yelling things into a cell phone at top volume when you're out in the street.

The First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to the American Constitution, and equivalents elsewhere in the world.

Re: The FBI Used the Web’s Favorite Hacking Tool to Unmask Tor Users

#24

Post by cbd1984 »

coldtea wrote: post #8
watty wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does this surprise you? The internet is made up all of all sorts of fabricated content, proof should be required.

People always demanding hard proof seem to have an inability to draw conclusions for themselves. Are there are missing facts and figures? Yes. Welcome to real life, where you have to make up your mind with what you have available. People have to learn to use and correlate the information they have, historical information, precedent etc, and make up a model for what's going on, instead of demaning some sanctious data…

> People always demanding hard proof seem to have an inability to draw conclusions for themselves.

I shall notify the scientific journals of this conclusion forthwith.

Next up: "The abstract is just TL;DR culture which is killing literacy. If you want to know what's in a paper, read it."

Re: The FBI Used the Web’s Favorite Hacking Tool to Unmask Tor Users

#25

Post by bowmessage »

plethora99 wrote: post #5

This kind of scares me. I don't know much about the case, but the guy is an IT worker, and it's hard for me to believe he'd have such terrible opsec, and he says it wasn't him. I'm all for catching pedophiles and everything, but how did we know it was actually him behind the computer at the time the flash file was loaded? What if it were a friend at the house (maybe even someone intending to frame him), or a virus on…

I was wondering about this as well. Couldn't a nefarious Tor user install some sort of outgoing packet-cleaner, which would spoof their outgoing I.P. address for all packets unrelated to Tor?

I.e: because the flash exploit didn't establish two-way clearnet communication with the target computer, how can they prove that the outgoing clearnet I.P. was not spoofed?

EDIT: Nevermind, I was assuming too much about the operation of the exploit. More details, for those who are interested, can be found here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110723083319/http://decloak.ne...

Re: The FBI Used the Web’s Favorite Hacking Tool to Unmask Tor Users

#26

Post by vilhelm_s »

meowface wrote: post #15

This article is talking about 2 different things. If you write a simple Flash program that opens a socket to a remote server, you can embed that on a site and use it to identify certain people running through Tor or any other SOCKS/HTTP proxy. It will only catch people who have configured their proxy very poorly. This has been known for well over a decade and it just catches the low-hanging fruit; it's really not an…

According to the article, Operation Torpedo happened one year earlier than the Freedom Hosting hack. I don't think we have seen the results of the latter yet.

Re: The FBI Used the Web’s Favorite Hacking Tool to Unmask Tor Users

#27

Post by tux3 »

bowmessage wrote: post #25
plethora99 wrote: post #5

This kind of scares me. I don't know much about the case, but the guy is an IT worker, and it's hard for me to believe he'd have such terrible opsec, and he says it wasn't him. I'm all for catching pedophiles and everything, but how did we know it was actually him behind the computer at the time the flash file was loaded? What if it were a friend at the house (maybe even someone intending to frame him), or a virus on…

I was wondering about this as well. Couldn't a nefarious Tor user install some sort of outgoing packet-cleaner, which would spoof their outgoing I.P. address for all packets unrelated to Tor? I.e: because the flash exploit didn't establish two-way clearnet communication with the target computer, how can they prove that the outgoing clearnet I.P. was not spoofed? EDIT: Nevermind, I was assuming too much about the oper…

>I.e: because the flash exploit didn't establish two-way clearnet communication with the target computer, how can they prove that the outgoing clearnet I.P. was not spoofed?

I'd assume that the flash snippet establishes a TCP connection, so it has to complete a handshake first. Those are fairly hard to spoof.

Re: The FBI Used the Web’s Favorite Hacking Tool to Unmask Tor Users

#28

Post by coldtea »

cbd1984 wrote: post #24
coldtea wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People always demanding hard proof seem to have an inability to draw conclusions for themselves. Are there are missing facts and figures? Yes. Welcome to real life, where you have to make up your mind with what you have available. People have to learn to use and correlate the information they have, historical information, precedent etc, and make up a model for what's going on, instead of demaning some sanctious data…

> People always demanding hard proof seem to have an inability to draw conclusions for themselves. I shall notify the scientific journals of this conclusion forthwith. Next up: "The abstract is just TL;DR culture which is killing literacy. If you want to know what's in a paper, read it. "

>I shall notify the scientific journals of this conclusion forthwith.

No, you should just re-read the part that says:

>Welcome to real life, where you have to make up your mind with what you have available. People have to learn to use and correlate the information they have, historical information, precedent etc, and make up a model for what's going on, instead of demanding some sanctious data to be passed upon them, like a Holy Book.

And then you must have to learn to consider the context when replying -- which was not scientific research.

If you expect peer reviewed hard data handed down from the likes of the FBI before you make up your mind, you're obviously not paying attention.

Re: The FBI Used the Web’s Favorite Hacking Tool to Unmask Tor Users

#29

Post by sp332 »

cbd1984 wrote: post #23
rday wrote: post #20

> Like any encryption or privacy system, Tor is popular with criminals. Out of curiosity, what is the bar for "popular"? Are the majority of criminals using Tor? I expect Public Defenders are much more popular with criminals. I also expect saying "Public Defenders are popular with criminals" would sound like I'm trying to discredit those people...

You know what else is popular with criminals? Walls. Mailing using envelopes instead of postcards, especially those envelopes with the ink patterns that make it harder to see through them. Not yelling things into a cell phone at top volume when you're out in the street. The First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to the American Constitution, and equivalents elsewhere in the world.

Cash! Dollar bills are like anonymous physical bitcoins!

Re: The FBI Used the Web’s Favorite Hacking Tool to Unmask Tor Users

#30

Post by RexRollman »

cbd1984 wrote: post #23
rday wrote: post #20

> Like any encryption or privacy system, Tor is popular with criminals. Out of curiosity, what is the bar for "popular"? Are the majority of criminals using Tor? I expect Public Defenders are much more popular with criminals. I also expect saying "Public Defenders are popular with criminals" would sound like I'm trying to discredit those people...

You know what else is popular with criminals? Walls. Mailing using envelopes instead of postcards, especially those envelopes with the ink patterns that make it harder to see through them. Not yelling things into a cell phone at top volume when you're out in the street. The First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to the American Constitution, and equivalents elsewhere in the world.

"Mailing using envelopes instead of postcards"

Which is why there is a program to track the envelopes of all postal mail.

Post reply on HN