FINDING · EVALUATION
The architectural coupling of 'surfing' and 'serving' in Tor's bridge design—where enabling the bridge service is required to use Tor as a client—means a bridge always accepts connections whenever its operator is online, allowing a remote non-global adversary to probe a bridge's availability at negligible cost (less than 2 bps per bridge per status check via SYN/RST). Of the 247 enumerated bridges, only an average of 29.6 (just over 10%) were accessible at any given moment, providing a highly discriminating availability signal for intersection attacks.
From 2009-mclachlan-risks — On the risks of serving whenever you surf: Vulnerabilities in Tor's blocking resistance design · §2.2, §4.2 · 2009 · Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society
Implications
- Bridge designs intended for use by at-risk operators should structurally separate the client role from the relay role—either via separate Tor instances on separate machines or via explicit decoupling mechanisms—so that operating a bridge does not require the operator to expose their own usage patterns.
- Any system where a volunteer's willingness to relay implies their simultaneous use of the network (e.g., default-on bridging) creates an inherent intersection attack surface; opt-in bridging with explicit surfing/serving separation is a prerequisite for operator privacy.
Tags
Extracted by claude-sonnet-4-6 — review before relying.