-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 45
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Consider consolidating and simplifying sd-whonix/sd-proxy #456
Comments
A balanced approach would still get us quite a reduction in complexity:
Since we merged #447, we're customizing the underlying |
Given the workstation's limited needs, I think it's feasible to do this with Tor's transparent proxy support (see: |
As one data point, most of my recent updater run failures have been due to update failures specifically on the Whonix templates, usually due to an "Invalid response from proxy: Unable to connect" tinyproxy error. This is with the clearnet repos configured, not the onion service ones. If this is a common experience, it may be more grist for the mill of either simplifying our Whonix config our eliminating the dependency on Whonix altogether. |
Removing our dependency on Whonix would …
Practical aspects of replacing our use of Whonix gatewayOption 1Connect sd-proxy to the internet directly, but isolate it as best as possible.
Option 2Create a new qube called
ImplementationThere's some overlap between the two so I tried to summarise it, let me know if splitting this up would be helpful:
Personal preferencesWhile removing features (or fortuitous side effects) is hardly ever great, I think the trade-off here is worth it. I'd opt for Option 1. Please note, that would probably affect our threat model, but I think it'd be the setup that is easiest to understand/maintain and most "future proof" for when In addition, I think there is an argument to be made that Option 1 should really be |
I am a big +1 on this solely for "decrease the overall complexity of the workstation". Minor nit: I think we should re-host tor debs for the workstation just like we do for the server. Or just grab them from bullseye-backports, which are kept roughly up to date with new Tor releases. |
Regarding Option 1, I realised that we could use Qubes' firewall system for outgoing connections, which I think would be preferable, because it allows us to block access to private network addresses ( |
Still into this, will probably proceed with an |
Because
sd-proxy
does not use a browser, there are only limited security benefits in the split VM architecture we currently use to access Tor. The complexity cost is significant. Post-beta, we should consider the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches:The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: