• ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      isn’t it less vulnerable, though?

      it has higher latency, even variable latency if you set up variable hops, and everyone routes the traffic of a lot of other users, so a lot of data they can gather from timing info is noise by default

      • ShortN0te@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        13 days ago

        Yes it has better defenses against timing attacks. Just alone the fact that multiple packets are bundled together makes it harder to identify the route a single package used.

        Also, it seems that I2P is more vulnerable against deanonymization when leaving the hidden network, i think the official I2P faq has some info about that, but have not read up upon it myself.

        • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          Also, it seems that I2P is more vulnerable against deanonymization when leaving the hidden network, i think the official I2P faq has some info about that, but have not read up upon it myself.

          on a quick look I did not find such a mention, but in any case in addition to that, I2P users often don’t have such a fortified browser as Tor users do, so that’s also something to count with.

          and maybe it’s not a good idea either to just reconfigure a Tor browser profile for I2P

      • ShortN0te@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        14 days ago

        Garlic routing[1] is a variant of onion routing that encrypts multiple messages together to make it more difficult[2] for attackers to perform traffic analysis and to increase the speed of data transfer.[3]

        First sentence. Check up the linked article as source.