15:58:18 <onyinyang[m]> #startmeeting tor anti-censorship meeting
15:58:18 <MeetBot> Meeting started Thu Jun 15 15:58:18 2023 UTC.  The chair is onyinyang[m]. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:58:18 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
15:58:22 <shelikhoo> Hi~
15:58:46 <onyinyang[m]> hi everyone :)
15:58:47 <onyinyang[m]> here is our meeting pad: https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-anti-censorship-keep
15:59:22 <meskio> hello
16:01:19 <ggus> hi
16:02:03 <shelikhoo> hi ggus, there is one thing I would like to request a quick comment from you: do you think users will be significantly benefited from an armored url scheme that can self heal when an error is detected, or just show there is an error will be enough? https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/anti-censorship/team/-/issues/126#note_2907457
16:05:07 <onyinyang[m]> ggus:  ^
16:05:19 <ggus> shelikhoo: i'm reading the whole ticket
16:05:31 <onyinyang[m]> ah, sorry to ping you again XD
16:05:45 <shelikhoo> yes, thanks~ there is no hurry
16:06:06 <onyinyang[m]> Otherwise it looks like we only have the webtunnel bridge campaign to discuss I think?
16:06:30 <meskio> nothing needed to discuss from the previous week?
16:06:56 <meskio> anyway, I can go with the webtunnel campaign
16:07:05 <onyinyang[m]> I think I am confused by the way the pad is organized. . .
16:07:16 <meskio> me too
16:07:31 <meskio> there are three points from last week, not sure if any of those needs talking about
16:07:38 <meskio> if not maybe we can remove them...
16:07:46 <onyinyang[m]> Ok, let's give space for that first.
16:07:53 <onyinyang[m]> Is there anything to discuss from last week?
16:08:05 <meskio> actually the webtunnel campaign is the same one than the third one...
16:08:13 <meskio> or connected :)
16:08:32 <meskio> so yes for the last, maybe not for the snowflake ones...
16:09:12 * meskio deletes them then
16:09:35 <onyinyang[m]> Ok, so then, let's move on to the webtunnel discussion :)
16:09:40 <meskio> cool
16:09:59 <onyinyang[m]> The discussion topic is:
16:09:59 <onyinyang[m]> Documents for bridge operators about how to run a webtunnel bridge (Updated Jun 15)
16:09:59 <onyinyang[m]> https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/anti-censorship/pluggable-transports/webtunnel/-/merge_requests/11
16:10:03 <meskio> as last week was mentioned shelikhoo has written a documenation for bridge operators
16:10:23 <shelikhoo> yes, I have amended it as recommended
16:10:32 <shelikhoo> so now it is ready for an final review
16:10:38 <meskio> there will be a relay operators meeting June 24 (in a bit more than a week) were we plan to encorage people to run webtunnel bridges
16:10:58 <meskio> ggus: what do you need to have ready before that meeting?
16:11:16 <meskio> should we move shelikhoo's documentation into the community portal? or is it fine in the webtunnel README?
16:13:04 <ggus> if the documentation is ready and we want volunteers to run, it should live in the community portal: relay/setup/bridge/webtunnel
16:13:34 <shelikhoo> Yes, then I send a merge request there and don't include it in webtunnel's readme
16:13:51 <shelikhoo> then I can send a merge request there and don't include it in webtunnel's readme
16:13:59 <meskio> I think it will be handy to include a link in the readme
16:14:07 <ggus> or if you want first to do a soft launch to caught errors, we can do the readme for june and then push to the portal
16:14:08 <shelikhoo> yes, it will be a link
16:14:45 <shelikhoo> I think it should have a soft launch first
16:15:03 <shelikhoo> since we have not get any production testing of this before
16:15:08 <ggus> writing docs on the portal involves gitlab-ci pipelines, reviewers... it's time consuming.
16:15:15 <ggus> shelikhoo: sounds good
16:15:48 <meskio> makes sense, let's keep it for now in the readme, point operators there and see in some time if we can move it to the community portal
16:16:16 <shelikhoo> okay, then we can proceed with put it on the readme, and, move it to the community portal once we know there isn't any major issue with it
16:16:54 <shelikhoo> I have tested it myself, but additional testing from users are as important
16:17:08 <shelikhoo> yes. EOF from me
16:17:39 <onyinyang[m]> Well, it seems my computer decided to freeze in the meantime.
16:17:39 <ggus> great! this plan sounds good!
16:18:04 <meskio> onyinyang[m]: ouch
16:18:26 <meskio> great, I don't have anything else on this
16:18:34 <ggus> meskio: for the meetup, a short presentation would be helpful. our volunteers usually have a lot of questions about new PTs
16:19:04 <meskio> ggus: like some slides introducing what webtunnel is and how is it useful?
16:19:16 <ggus> for example, requirements and if they can run webtunnel+obfs4
16:19:23 <ggus> meskio: yes
16:19:38 <meskio> ok
16:19:54 <ggus> meskio: if they need to set a specific distribution method in their torrc
16:20:31 <meskio> cool, so not just the description of the PT, but also details on how to run it
16:20:54 <onyinyang[m]> Ok, The next item for discussion is Conjure user feedback
16:20:56 <meskio> shelikhoo: I'll be in the operators meetup, I can do the presenation but happy to leave it to you if you want
16:21:06 <ggus> meskio: yes, like "can i run it on my raspberry pi?"
16:21:44 <ggus> meetup details: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/community/relays/-/issues/70
16:23:18 <shelikhoo> meskio: okay it is online, i can do this
16:23:41 <meskio> shelikhoo: cool, let me know if you need any help
16:23:57 <shelikhoo> i was thinking it will be something offline and thinking a lot...
16:24:05 <shelikhoo> until i find out it is online...
16:24:11 <shelikhoo> yes
16:24:21 <meskio> yes, the regular operators meetups are online :)
16:24:53 <meskio> but is on saturday...
16:24:58 <ggus> we'll have an afk meetup in cccamp. :)
16:25:06 <meskio> yeah!
16:25:19 <meskio> we can talk about webtunnel there too, I'll be there
16:25:48 <meskio> onyinyang[m]: I think we (or at least me) are done with this topic :)
16:26:00 <shelikhoo> Saturday is fine...
16:26:04 <onyinyang[m]> ok sorry for jumping the gun earlier
16:26:05 <shelikhoo> EOF from me
16:26:08 <meskio> :)
16:26:19 * onyinyang[m] restarted her computer in the meantime \o/
16:26:38 <onyinyang[m]> ok, let's actually move on to the next topic then
16:27:02 <onyinyang[m]> which is the discussion on Conjure user feedback
16:27:05 <ggus> Alright, it's me
16:27:18 <ggus> we launched the call for testers two weeks ago
16:27:28 <ggus> it's available here: https://forum.torproject.net/t/call-for-testers-help-the-tor-project-to-test-conjure-on-tor-browser-alpha/7815
16:27:44 <cohosh> thanks for bringing this up ggus, i wasn't watching that forum thread closely and should've been more active on it
16:28:07 <ggus> and i also shared in other places too: https://ntc.party/t/call-for-testers-help-the-tor-project-to-test-conjure-on-tor-browser-alpha/4701
16:28:37 <ggus> we got feedback from users in RU, IR, CN and TM.
16:29:26 <ggus> but i'm not super confident on the results. for example, some users in IR said that it wasn't possible to connect
16:30:38 <ggus> i wonder what are the next steps here.
16:30:50 <ggus> writing a new ooni-probe test?
16:30:51 <cohosh> this wouldn't surprise me given that conjure was deployed for psiphon which has been super popular in iran
16:31:11 <cohosh> i think before ooni probe we should do more targeted analysis to figure out why it's being blocked
16:31:38 <cohosh> conjure doesn't have a lot of the censorship resistance features implemented yet that it should have eventually
16:31:41 <cohosh> like utls
16:32:05 <cohosh> or if it's being blocked because the ip address space is blocked
16:32:32 <cohosh> i think that's on me to come up with better log messages and maybe we can try and get conjure logs from people who have tested it
16:33:51 <ggus> cohosh: maybe we could add conjure test in logcollector/vantage points too?
16:33:59 <cohosh> yeah that'd be a good idea
16:34:07 <shelikhoo> yeah!
16:34:39 <shelikhoo> i think it shouldn't be too hard
16:35:26 * cohosh opens a new issue for that
16:35:40 <ggus> ok! i'll keep promoting the topic. hopefully our contacts in china will share it too
16:35:43 <meskio> cohosh: I see there is this one: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/anti-censorship/pluggable-transports/conjure/-/issues/16
16:36:06 <meskio> not sure if we need PT LOGs to make it easier for users to provide feedback
16:36:14 <ggus> but so far, i'm very happy that this topic got a good attention of our community in censored regions
16:36:31 <meskio> shelikhoo: can you open an issue on the probeobserver side?
16:36:31 <cohosh> https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/anti-censorship/pluggable-transports/conjure/-/issues/33
16:36:56 <cohosh> ggus: yeah this is great, thanks for running this!
16:37:15 <meskio> ahh, ok, the issue on conjure side is for logcollector...
16:37:18 <meskio> good
16:37:46 <onyinyang[m]> anything else on this topic?
16:37:53 <meskio> EOF
16:38:02 <shelikhoo> yes, I will create one on logcollector side as well
16:38:03 <shelikhoo> EOF
16:38:28 <onyinyang[m]> anything else in general for this meeting? All of the points on the agenda have been discussed afaict
16:38:28 <ggus> all good. i have a follow up question about webtunnel
16:38:39 <onyinyang[m]> oh, go for it ggus
16:39:10 <ggus> when we will do a similar call for testing for webtunnel?
16:39:40 <meskio> two choices here:
16:39:43 <ggus> don't need to answer a specific date now, just want to plan the next call for tests.
16:39:54 <meskio> * test it with a bridge we run ourselves and provide to people
16:40:08 <meskio> * wait for bridge operators to run some bridges and ask people to test on them
16:40:54 <meskio> I'm a bit inclined to the second so we don't have to work on both campaigns at once
16:41:42 <ggus> i'm asking because in july we will have onion pow testing - https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/community/team/-/issues/93
16:42:12 <shelikhoo> personally, my opinion is that once we got enough bridge and users can get one from https distributor. If we can go the first option if too few webtunnel bridge show up after a while
16:42:35 <ggus> y'all were too busy developing cool projects in the past months, and we have many new things to test :)
16:43:00 <meskio> :)
16:43:05 <meskio> shelikhoo: that sounds good as a plan
16:43:26 <meskio> we might also want to wait for TB 12.5, as webtunnel will be included there, so users don't need to run aplha to try it
16:44:35 <shelikhoo> yes, anyway we should be able to wait a little(said without any consideration for contract deadlines)
16:44:38 <ggus> shelikhoo: meskio: we could do a soft testing of webtunnel in july. a) get some webtunnel bridges, b) ask our user support team to give to some users in censored region, c) meet with ac-team to share fedback, d) move the docs to the community portal and call for testers and operators?
16:45:17 <meskio> sounds good
16:45:36 <shelikhoo> ggus: we might need to wait for webtunnel to be included in stable tor browser before giving it to users
16:45:58 <shelikhoo> otherwise some user might use a version of tor browser without webtunnel support and given a webtunnel bridgeline
16:46:00 <ggus> ok, tb-12.5 will happen next week
16:46:15 <shelikhoo> yes... then it will be fine ^~^
16:46:16 <meskio> ohh, nice
16:48:39 <onyinyang[m]> anything else to discuss today?
16:49:06 <shelikhoo> EOF
16:49:07 <ggus> https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/community/team/-/issues/94
16:49:34 <ggus> forgive my lack of markdown skills :)
16:49:53 <meskio> :D
16:49:56 <onyinyang[m]> thanks ggus
16:50:32 <shelikhoo> ^~^ thanks ggus
16:50:49 <onyinyang[m]> and thanks everyone for your comments and discussion today :)
16:50:50 <onyinyang[m]> #endmeeting