Anonabox Analysis

Re:Anonabox Analysis by TehCorwiz on Monday April 06, 2015 @02:20PM (#9329734)

Color me crazy, but the odd 126 ip space kinda makes to me. Consider that one of the more common attacks on Tor users is IP leakage from the browser. In this setup the local ip would map to a real public ip, but would be entirely useless.

I personally don't think that it's a good solution. Poor operational security can't be solved by misdirection.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Anonabox Analysis by duskwuff on Monday April 06, 2015 @02:38PM (#9329856)

I still don't see the point. If there's a vulnerability that can be used to leak your LAN address, you want the leaked address to be as generic as possible. Something like "192.168.0.2" is perfect; a crazy 126.16.2.x address is unusual and could be used to fingerprint Anonabox users.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Anonabox Analysis by lbthomsen on Monday April 06, 2015 @02:27PM (#9329793)

That and the semi-randomized SSID have been bugging me all day while I wrote that wiki entry. I simply can't see the logic in or reasoning behind those decisions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Anonabox Analysis by tedks on Monday April 06, 2015 @02:31PM (#9329816)

This is a really good point. I totally missed it when reading the article. Maybe TAILS should do something like this automatically.

[ Parent | on HN ]