17:02:18 #startmeeting Applications Team Office Hours 2025-08-20 17:02:18 Meeting started Wed Aug 20 17:02:18 2025 UTC. The chair is morganava. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:02:18 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 17:02:48 it's that time of the week again where we engage with the community via IRC :3 17:02:49 o/ 17:02:53 or at least where we are scheduled to be online ;) 17:05:33 So in the last week, the bulk of the TLS things I worked on are not directly applicable to onion services without involving Namecoin. (The relevant grants cover both TLS for onions by themselves and TLS for Namecoin, with or without onions being involved.) The main things I did involved getting TLS to work for Namecoin while keeping the entire TLS-related data (even a hash) off of the Namecoin blockchain (yay for scalability). 17:07:09 In theory you could do the same thing for onions without Namecoin but you would maybe run into problems revoking TLS certs. (The way you revoke TLS certs in Namecoin if the TLS data is off-chain is by transferring your Namecoin domain to another Namecoin address... that's not a thing for onion services so it's not really doable.) 17:07:31 And onion service descriptors have much more data capacity than a blockchain so this is not really needed anyway if you're not using Namecoin 17:07:51 Nevertheless it should come in handy for onion service users who want to have Namecoin names for their onions 17:08:15 i've a question for you actually jeremy 17:08:44 morganava: sure what's up? 17:08:47 are you aware of any tor-embedding apps/tools that make use of the tor-expert-bundle's pluggable-transports and bridge lines? 17:09:00 we're working on transitioning over the meek-azure name to just meek 17:09:08 since it hasn't used azure for quite awhile 17:09:37 we've a tracking issue here -> https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/team/-/issues/37 17:09:52 morganava: I am 90% sure that Whonix bundles a GUI tool for picking bridges. I am 60% sure that OnionShare has some kind of mechanism for this as well. 17:09:53 just occurred to me you may have your fingers in other parts of the internet 17:10:24 * ma1 loves percentage confidence assessments 17:10:32 lol 17:10:59 Sounds like perhaps poking Patrick Schleizer and/or Micah Lee might be productive to make sure that they can assess whether this will break anything for them 17:11:18 yeah we already opened an issue with OnoinShare 17:11:24 p sure micahlee doesn't maintain it anymore 17:11:25 I can probably poke Patrick if you like; I don't have any contact with Micah Lee 17:11:39 ah, wasn't aware that OnionShare has a new maintainer 17:11:39 yeah that'd be good, at least point them to our tracking issue 17:11:51 (probably says something about how often I use OnionShare these days lol) 17:12:23 alright, I'll see if I can poke Patrick. What's the approximate deadline by which these changes would be deployed and/or when you would need feedback? 17:12:50 we're targetting the 15.0 release in late sep/early to mid october 17:13:10 ok. So, it's important to look at promptly, but not an emergency 17:13:14 but really only matters if they are using TB's built-in bridge lines 17:13:28 the ClientTransport w/e line stays the same since it's just the user-facing name that's changing 17:13:42 I see. 17:13:52 ie the protocol remains meek_lite 17:14:08 yeah I don't know whether this would affect Whonix 17:14:16 Definitely worth asking them 17:14:22 But there's a decent chance that it won't impact them 17:14:36 but if they've the equivalent of our 'built-in' meek-azure bridges then there could be upgrade/migration issues if the lines are pulled from pt_config.json 17:14:45 yeah better safe than sorry :) 17:14:53 yeah makes sense 17:16:14 which makes me think: have we got an announcement mechanism (a mailing list or something) for heads up to downstream projects? 17:16:26 in general 17:16:32 tor-dev mailing list I guess? 17:16:46 ma1 (IRC): AFAIK the only thing like that is tor-dev ML but that's going to be a really bad SNR for this kind of alerts 17:16:50 we've mostly been adding downstream people to our release-prep templates as its made sense 17:17:04 I have definitely missed relevant notices in tor-dev because the SNR is so bad 17:17:41 ma1: yes, tor-dev apparently. OP subscribed a long time ago I assume cus my OP mailbox got morgan's update on it 17:17:45 Starting a new mailing list for application and distro devs who are downstream of Tor seems like a not-terrible idea? 17:18:13 maybe tor-announce 17:18:17 (specifically for notices like this, I mean) 17:18:21 ah right a developer foucsed tor-announce 17:18:28 but couldnt say how many other new or newer project are on that 17:18:35 tor-dev's activity is so little these days though 17:18:45 its probablyf ine 17:18:57 maybe turning it into a moderated PSA list? 17:19:11 something I've mentioned else where, we might almost want to start some semi official tor-client-users ... something? "council" i joked, that teams can register on 17:19:22 to both get updates like this, and provide feedback on arti dev in the future 17:19:38 and generally so the nebulous we of TPI can maybe have better insight in the tor using community 17:20:32 i dont even know what format most folks would want lol. RSS, email, forum, wiki, issues? 17:21:01 tik tok 17:21:05 LOL 17:23:07 actually I have a question about onion TLS things. This is probably a better question for Q and Rhatto but if you guys have opinions I'd like to hear them. Which would you prefer: 17:23:10 (Option A) make onion service owners put their current TLS pubkey in their onion descriptor (you revoke by removing it); (Option B) keep the current TLS pubkey out of the onion descriptor, but if you want to revoke, you put the revocation in the onion descriptor. 17:24:11 I feel like people typically create TLS keys more often than they think a TLS key is compromised 17:24:35 So Option B might be more aligned with the common use case? 17:25:21 (to be clear this question assumes Namecoin isn't being used) 17:29:23 I don't really think this is something we from the apps team have expertise about ^_^; 17:30:03 we won't talk if not in the presence of our law... of rhatto :) 17:30:13 PieroV: yeah I figured that was likely 17:30:21 We usually refer to people who are more into these sort of things, to avoid doing insecure stuff 17:30:24 Just didn't want to make assumptions about what you guys would care about 17:30:35 So, rhatto might be more useful here 17:30:57 +1 to rhatto :3 17:31:34 just a naive curiosity: option B would mean the descriptor should accumulate all the revocations, in case of multiple revoked certs? 17:31:54 One other thing I did do was continue looking into optimizing the binary size of the various Namecoin and Onion TLS tools I maintain, mainly by trying to replace dependencies that are overly bloated 17:32:18 So hopefully by the time you guys get something TLS-related from me for possible deployment, the binary size will be nice and small 17:32:53 Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[mds]: for Android x86 we're really on the edge 17:33:03 We pass by some tens of kB D: 17:33:20 ma1 (IRC): I'm thinking the certifications would have a built-in expiration date, so you'd only need to accumulate the revocations until expiry hits, at which point you can drop them from the descriptor 17:33:21 However, a cypherpunk recently suggested a few interesting compiler options 17:33:47 I still have to try them, but I think they'll be a Tor Browser 16.0 thing (hopefully) 17:34:52 ma1 (IRC): I assume an expiration period of maybe a year or so should be sane, but if people really want to pick a different expiry period I don't see much reason to tell them they can't, I'm not their mom and they probably understand their threat model better than I do 17:35:10 ooh i just realised we'll be hitting android size problems sooner in the Alpha branch going forward 17:35:12 fun 17:36:07 PieroV: ouch good to know. I don't know if we can make tens of kB be a thing but there is definitely some mad science I haven't tried yet that should yield a really big improvement compared to where things sit now 17:36:58 But anyway it sounds like whatever stuff I end up providing for deployment would probably end up in desktop before mobile, so mobile is probably a problem for future me 17:37:08 The cypherpunk linked to a forum post mentioning --pack-dyn-relocs=relr 17:37:14 I don't have a clue about what it does 17:37:24 visibility=hidden might also help 17:37:39 And then ICF (Identical Code Folding) 17:38:04 PieroV: lol, compiler flag blackmagic is very outside of my bailiwick but I enjoy the fact that it exists 17:38:18 This is even more obscure 17:38:21 It's linker magic 17:38:41 ah of course 17:38:46 ICF isn't even sound in some platforms 17:38:54 And there's a subset (--icf=safe) 17:38:56 naturally the truly insane things would be in the linker 17:39:40 (doesn't Mozilla abuse Clang linker functionality to provide some kind of proxy leak protection?) 17:40:03 Mozilla already uses --icf=safe in prod builds if I understand correctly 17:40:18 But Mozilla def abuses compilers, UB (when not undefined in Clang), and so on 17:40:22 morganava: have we seen any size reduction since the recent "remove a bunch of AI stuff" patch? 17:40:49 when did it go in? 17:40:56 should be easy enough to spot in nightlies 17:41:44 https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/tor-browser/-/merge_requests/1616 17:41:47 looks like 6 days ago? 17:41:58 * morganava cheks 17:42:20 Oh one other fun maybe-exciting thing I'm playing around with. (Also currently Namecoin-only but could be done for onions by themselves if it's considered desirable.) 17:42:35 Self-authenticating SSH server keys 17:42:45 Works very similarly to TLS 17:43:00 looks like no difference 17:43:08 on android at least 17:43:08 morganava: huh apparently like not at all? makes me think if theres engines included to power it we didnt get them? jsut all the UI stuff? 17:43:24 Do you guys know if there exist any nontrivial set of people who run SSH on onion services? I assume it must be a thing but I have not looked. 17:43:30 1m on linux but would need to do like actual spreadsheets to see if it's a real effect 17:43:35 or we already got it in application-services noop and are just now disconnecting the UI that'd be broken? 17:43:49 Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[mds]: I don't think there are stats for that 17:43:53 that sounds like a brizental question 17:44:12 re application-services not SSH 17:44:27 PieroV: alright. 17:44:54 re: ssh: I remember some time ago it just wasn't possible, something to do with UDP? but it became more possible more recently? was that cus UDP support landed? or a way to force SSH to do TCP landed? 17:44:55 Do you guys have (uninformed) opinions on whether it'd be cool to have SSH over onions work without having to manually verify a key fingerprint? 17:45:40 dan_b: that's news to me, I definitely recall seeing documentation many years ago for doing SSH over onions 17:45:56 huh, not sure how long ago I last looked, it was a while 17:46:04 dan_b: wasn't the Silk Road guy arrested because he fucked up his SSH onion config or something? 17:46:18 dan_b: maybe you're referring to verifying the key over DNS, so UDP for that? 17:46:22 * Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[mds] might be misremembering 17:47:04 PieroV: oh, that definitely could be. The approach I'm doing wouldn't have that issue 17:47:47 well actually 17:47:59 I just remembered that I routinely SSH into the Namecoin.org server over Tor 17:48:08 And that's in Whonix so UDP definitely is not leaking 17:48:30 So SSH over Tor definitely is a thing, regardless of whether SSH over onions is common 17:49:14 ah i was referring specifically to ssh on an onion service? 17:49:16 but cool 17:50:27 dan_b: I vaguely recall that I gave a colleague SSH access to a VM of mine over an onion service a few years ago 17:50:33 But maybe I'm hallucinating that memory 17:50:40 cool! 17:50:44 i'll go look again then! 17:50:44 Anyway 17:51:22 yeah setting up SSH over onion is fairly straight forward 17:51:23 Assuming that SSH over onions is possible, would self-authenticating keys be interesting/cool? 17:52:05 (I assume it should be useful for the same reasons it's cool for TLS) 17:52:46 I guess it's a question for SSH over onion users ^_^; 17:52:56 And yeah obviously I will poke Rhatto and Q 17:53:06 I prefer doing my verification once and with conventional ways :) 17:53:16 Just figured I'd be negligent to not see if you guys had opinions 17:53:59 donuts taught us not to have opinions on what users want :) 17:54:10 heh 17:54:15 alright folks 17:54:20 but thank you for your consideration <3 17:54:26 good chatting as always 17:54:32 but i'mg oing to end the bot so i can get some dinner <3 17:54:36 later o/ 17:54:40 #endmeeting