Ingo Blechschmidt commited on 2018-04-02 19:10:20
Zeige 3 geänderte Dateien mit 12 Einfügungen und 12 Löschungen.
Signed-off-by: hiro <hiro@torproject.org>
... | ... |
@@ -204,8 +204,8 @@ using technology?</a></li> |
204 | 204 |
|
205 | 205 |
<p>But the real answer is to implement application-level auth systems, |
206 | 206 |
to let in well-behaving users and keep out badly-behaving users. This |
207 |
- needs to be based on some property of the human (such as a password he |
|
208 |
- knows), not some property of the way his packets are transported. </p> |
|
207 |
+ needs to be based on some property of the human (such as a password they |
|
208 |
+ know), not some property of the way their packets are transported. </p> |
|
209 | 209 |
|
210 | 210 |
<p>Of course, not all IRC networks are trying to ban Tor nodes. After |
211 | 211 |
all, quite a few people use Tor to IRC in privacy in order to carry |
... | ... |
@@ -2453,8 +2453,8 @@ exit |
2453 | 2453 |
policies are propagated to Tor clients via the directory, so clients |
2454 | 2454 |
will automatically avoid picking exit relays that would refuse to |
2455 | 2455 |
exit to their intended destination. This way each relay can decide |
2456 |
- the services, hosts, and networks he wants to allow connections to, |
|
2457 |
- based on abuse potential and his own situation. Read the FAQ entry |
|
2456 |
+ the services, hosts, and networks it wants to allow connections to, |
|
2457 |
+ based on abuse potential and its own situation. Read the FAQ entry |
|
2458 | 2458 |
on |
2459 | 2459 |
<a href="<page docs/faq-abuse>#TypicalAbuses">issues you might |
2460 | 2460 |
encounter</a> |
... | ... |
@@ -2931,14 +2931,14 @@ Yes, you do get better anonymity against some attacks. |
2931 | 2931 |
</p> |
2932 | 2932 |
<p> |
2933 | 2933 |
The simplest example is an attacker who owns a small number of Tor relays. |
2934 |
-He will see a connection from you, but he won't be able to know whether |
|
2934 |
+They will see a connection from you, but they won't be able to know whether |
|
2935 | 2935 |
the connection originated at your computer or was relayed from somebody else. |
2936 | 2936 |
</p> |
2937 | 2937 |
<p> |
2938 | 2938 |
There are some cases where it doesn't seem to help: if an attacker can |
2939 |
-watch all of your incoming and outgoing traffic, then it's easy for him |
|
2939 |
+watch all of your incoming and outgoing traffic, then it's easy for them |
|
2940 | 2940 |
to learn which connections were relayed and which started at you. (In |
2941 |
-this case he still doesn't know your destinations unless he is watching |
|
2941 |
+this case they still don't know your destinations unless they are watching |
|
2942 | 2942 |
them too, but you're no better off than if you were an ordinary client.) |
2943 | 2943 |
</p> |
2944 | 2944 |
<p> |
... | ... |
@@ -2948,7 +2948,7 @@ signal to an attacker that you place a high value on your anonymity. |
2948 | 2948 |
Second, there are some more esoteric attacks that are not as |
2949 | 2949 |
well-understood or well-tested that involve making use of the knowledge |
2950 | 2950 |
that you're running a relay -- for example, an attacker may be able to |
2951 |
-"observe" whether you're sending traffic even if he can't actually watch |
|
2951 |
+"observe" whether you're sending traffic even if they can't actually watch |
|
2952 | 2952 |
your network, by relaying traffic through your Tor relay and noticing |
2953 | 2953 |
changes in traffic timing. |
2954 | 2954 |
</p> |
... | ... |
@@ -3475,7 +3475,7 @@ keys, |
3475 | 3475 |
locations, exit policies, and so on. So unless the adversary can |
3476 | 3476 |
control |
3477 | 3477 |
a majority of the directory authorities (as of 2012 there are 8 |
3478 |
- directory authorities), he can't trick the Tor client into using |
|
3478 |
+ directory authorities), they can't trick the Tor client into using |
|
3479 | 3479 |
other Tor relays. |
3480 | 3480 |
</p> |
3481 | 3481 |
|
... | ... |
@@ -4213,7 +4213,7 @@ only solution is to have no opinion. |
4213 | 4213 |
Like all anonymous communication networks that are fast enough for web |
4214 | 4214 |
browsing, Tor is vulnerable to statistical "traffic confirmation" |
4215 | 4215 |
attacks, where the adversary watches traffic at both ends of a circuit |
4216 |
- and confirms his guess that they're communicating. It would be really |
|
4216 |
+ and confirms their guess that those endpoints are communicating. It would be really |
|
4217 | 4217 |
nice if we could use cover traffic to confuse this attack. But there |
4218 | 4218 |
are three problems here: |
4219 | 4219 |
</p> |
... | ... |
@@ -107,9 +107,9 @@ |
107 | 107 |
the same set of <a |
108 | 108 |
href="<wikifaq>#Whatsthisaboutentryguardformerlyknownashelpernodes">entry |
109 | 109 |
guards</a> when creating new circuits. Otherwise an attacker |
110 |
- could run his own relay and force an onion service to create an arbitrary |
|
110 |
+ could run their own relay and force an onion service to create an arbitrary |
|
111 | 111 |
number of circuits in the hope that the corrupt relay is picked as entry |
112 |
- node and he learns the onion server's IP address via timing analysis. This |
|
112 |
+ node and they learn the onion server's IP address via timing analysis. This |
|
113 | 113 |
attack was described by Øverlier and Syverson in their paper titled |
114 | 114 |
<a href="http://freehaven.net/anonbib/#hs-attack06">Locating Hidden |
115 | 115 |
Servers</a>. |
116 | 116 |