Re: [Tails-dev] active probing vs. AdvGoalTracking [

Delete this message

Reply to this message
Author: intrigeri
Date:  
To: The Tails public development discussion list
Subject: Re: [Tails-dev] active probing vs. AdvGoalTracking [
Hi,

anonym wrote (07 Jan 2014 21:16:27 GMT) :
> I feel inclined to go the simple path: we always set scan_ssid=0.


Agreed.

> # How to completely disable directed Probe Requests (but not broadcasts)


> It should be noted that I haven't yet verified that any of the below
> solutions work. I've built some squeeze debs with the solution below and
> will try it one of these days.


Cool. ETA?

> ## NM in squeeze (0.8.1-6+squeeze2)


> We always set scan_ssid=0.


The patch looks trivial enough, good news. Hopefully it works :)

> ## NM in wheezy (0.9.4.0-10)


> Same as in squeeze (modulo line numbering).


Ditto.

> ## Upstream NM's git (as of commit 90782cf, 0.9.9.0 development)


> Nowadays NM actually tries to limit the privacy implications of active
> scanning by allowing at most five SSIDs from stored connections to be
> used for directed Probe Requests. That's not good enough, obvioudly, so
> we instead set the maximum to 0, which yields the same result as
> scan_ssid=0.


Makes sense. I'm glad to see that this piece of code didn't change
between Squeeze and Wheezy, and actually seems to go in the right
direction since then. Personally, it makes me more confident carrying
a patch if we have to (hopefully we won't have to, but well).

Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc