root / dotorg / v9 / html / beps / bep_0008.html

Revision 10894, 28.3 kB (checked in by dave, 11 months ago)

word smithing.

Line 
1<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
2<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
3<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
4<head>
5<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
6<meta name="generator" content="Docutils 0.5: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/" />
7<title></title>
8<link rel="stylesheet" href="../css/bep.css" type="text/css" />
9</head>
10<body>
11<div class="document">
12
13<div id="upper" class="clear">
14<div id="wrap">
15<div id="header">
16<h1><a href="../index.html">BitTorrent<span>.org</span></a></h1>
17</div>
18<div id="nav">
19<ul>
20<li><a href="../index.html">Home</a></li>
21<li><a href="../introduction.html">For Users</a></li>
22<li><a href="bep_0000.html"><span>For Developers</span></a></li>
23<!-- <li><a href="./blog">Blog</a></li> -->
24<li><a href="../donate.html">Donate!</a></li>
25</ul>
26</div> <!-- nav -->
27<!-- ### Begin Content ### -->
28<div id="second">
29
30
31
32<table class="rfc2822 docutils field-list" frame="void" rules="none">
33<col class="field-name" />
34<col class="field-body" />
35<tbody valign="top">
36<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">BEP:</th><td class="field-body">8</td>
37</tr>
38<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Title:</th><td class="field-body">Tracker Peer Obfuscation</td>
39</tr>
40<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Version:</th><td class="field-body">10891</td>
41</tr>
42<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Last-Modified:</th><td class="field-body"><a class="reference external" href="https://svn.bittorrent.com/trac.cgi/browser/dotorg/trunk/html/beps/bep_0008.rst">2008-02-19 15:44:01 -0800 (Tue, 19 Feb 2008)</a></td>
43</tr>
44<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Author:</th><td class="field-body">David Harrison &lt;dave&#32;&#97;t&#32;bittorrent.com&gt;, Anthony Ciani &lt;tony&#32;&#97;t&#32;ciani.phy.uic.edu&gt;, Arvid Norberg &lt;arvid&#32;&#97;t&#32;bittorrent.com&gt;, Greg Hazel &lt;greg&#32;&#97;t&#32;bittorrent.com&gt;</td>
45</tr>
46<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Status:</th><td class="field-body">Draft</td>
47</tr>
48<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Type:</th><td class="field-body">Standards Track</td>
49</tr>
50<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Created:</th><td class="field-body">31-Jan-2008</td>
51</tr>
52<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Post-History:</th><td class="field-body"></td>
53</tr>
54</tbody>
55</table>
56<hr />
57<div class="contents topic" id="contents">
58<p class="topic-title first">Contents</p>
59<ul class="simple">
60<li><a class="reference internal" href="#announce" id="id8">Announce</a></li>
61<li><a class="reference internal" href="#announce-response" id="id9">Announce Response</a></li>
62<li><a class="reference internal" href="#obfuscation-method" id="id10">Obfuscation Method</a></li>
63<li><a class="reference internal" href="#optimizations" id="id11">Optimizations</a></li>
64<li><a class="reference internal" href="#backwards-compatibility" id="id12">Backwards Compatibility</a></li>
65<li><a class="reference internal" href="#rationale" id="id13">Rationale</a></li>
66<li><a class="reference internal" href="#references" id="id14">References</a></li>
67<li><a class="reference internal" href="#example-python-code" id="id15">Example Python Code</a></li>
68</ul>
69</div>
70<p>This extends the tracker protocol to support simple obfuscation of the
71peers it returns, using the infohash as a shared secret between the
72peer and the tracker. The obfuscation does not provide any security
73against eavesdroppers that know the infohash of the torrent.  The goal
74is to prevent internet service providers and other network
75administrators from blocking or disrupting bittorrent traffic
76connections that span between the receiver of a tracker response and
77any peer IP-port appearing in that tracker response.</p>
78<p>The key words &quot;MUST&quot;, &quot;MUST NOT&quot;, &quot;REQUIRED&quot;, &quot;SHALL&quot;, &quot;SHALL NOT&quot;, &quot;SHOULD&quot;,
79&quot;SHOULD NOT&quot;, &quot;RECOMMENDED&quot;, &quot;MAY&quot;, and &quot;OPTIONAL&quot; in this document are
80to be interpreted as described in IETF <a class="reference external" href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">RFC 2119</a> <a class="footnote-reference" href="#id6" id="id7">[5]</a>.</p>
81<div class="section" id="announce">
82<h1>Announce</h1>
83<p>When using this extension, instead of passing the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">info_hash</span></tt> parameter
84to the tracker, a <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">sha_ih</span></tt> is passed.</p>
85<p>The value of <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">sha_ih</span></tt> MUST be the info-hash of the torrent, with a second
86SHA-1 applied to it.</p>
87<p>For example if a torrent has infohash with hex representation
88<tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">aaf4c61ddcc5e8a2dabedef3b482cd9aea9434d</span></tt> then its <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">sha_ih</span></tt> is
89<tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">sha1(infohash)='6b4f89a54e2d27ecd7e8da5b4ab8fd9d1d8b119'</span></tt>.</p>
90<p>The value MUST be url encoded, just like the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">info_hash</span></tt>.  Thus the
91<tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">sha_ih</span></tt> above when url encoded becomes
92<tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">kO%89%A5N-%27%EC%D7%E8%DA%05%B4%AB%8F%D9%D1%D8%B1%19</span></tt>.</p>
93<p>If the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">sha_ih</span></tt> is passed then the value for the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">port</span></tt> parameter
94should be treated as a 16 bit integer and MUST be obscured as
95described in the <a class="reference internal" href="#obfuscation-method">Obfuscation Method</a> section.  Similarly if the
96optional <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">ip</span></tt> parameter is passed in the announce then its value
97MUST also be so obscured.</p>
98<p>This extension does not change the semantics of any parameter passed
99in the peer's announce.</p>
100</div>
101<div class="section" id="announce-response">
102<h1>Announce Response</h1>
103<p>If the tracker supports this extension, the response should be exactly
104the same as if the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">info_hash</span></tt> had been passed, except that any
105field that contains peer information (such as <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">peers</span></tt>, <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">peers6</span></tt> or
106any other field defined by another extension) MUST be obfuscated as
107described in the next section.</p>
108<p>There are additional parameters the tracker may OPTIONALLY return.
109These are discussed in the <a class="reference internal" href="#optimizations">optimizations</a> section.</p>
110</div>
111<div class="section" id="obfuscation-method">
112<h1>Obfuscation Method</h1>
113<p>The values for the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">ip</span></tt> and <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">port</span></tt> announce parameters, the
114<em>returned peer list</em> and any other values that contain peer
115information are obscured using the method described in this section.</p>
116<p>We distinguish between the <em>tracker peer list</em> and the <em>returned peer
117list</em>.  The <em>tracker peer list</em> contains the ip-port pairs of all
118known peers in a given torrent, i.e., those peers that have reported
119to the tracker that they are transferring the file with a given
120infohash.  The tracker may store this peer list however it wishes.
121The <em>returned peer list</em> contains a packed array of ip-port pairs
122conforming to the BitTorrent protocol specification.  If the swarm is
123sufficiently large then the returned ip-port pairs constitute a subset
124of the ip-port pairs in the <em>tracker peer list</em>.</p>
125<p>When a parameter is obscured, it is encrypted using RC4-drop768
126encryption using the infohash as a shared secret and optionally
127employing an initialization vector.</p>
128<p>For the remainder of this document RC4 refers to RC4-drop768.  In the
129process of encryption, RC4 generates a pseudorandom string that is
130XOR'd with the plaintext to generate the ciphertext.  The receiver
131recovers the plaintext by generating the same pseudorandom string and
132XOR'ing it with the ciphertext.  In generating the pseudorandom
133string, the tracker and client MUST discard the first 768 bytes.  The
134next 8 bytes in the pseudorandom string are reserved for optimizations
135discussed in the next section.</p>
136<p>To communicate an initialization vector, the tracker includes in the
137bencoded response the parameter <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">iv</span></tt> with value set to a byte string
138containing the initialization vector.  The initialization vector can
139be of arbitrary length and is sent in plaintext.  Initialization
140vectors can only be applied to parameters in tracker responses and NOT
141to announces.</p>
142<p>If the tracker sends no initialization vector then the infohash is
143used as the RC4 key (160 bit key).  If the tracker provides an
144initialization vector then the RC4 key is generated by appending the
145vector to the infohash and then hashing with SHA-1.  The resulting
146hash is then used as the RC4 key.</p>
147<p>For example, given infohash <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">aaf4c61ddcc5e8a2dabedef3b482cd9aea9434d</span></tt>
148and initialization vector <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">abcd</span></tt> both represented in hex, the RC4 key
149is derived as follows:</p>
150<pre class="literal-block">
151key = sha1( 'aaf4c61ddcc5e8a2dabedef3b482cd9aea9434dabcd' )
152</pre>
153<p>The resulting key in hex is <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">f36e9cae87cf33e07645ef5ca745a8a83469f31e</span></tt>.</p>
154<p>It is RECOMMENDED that the tracker use the initialization vector, and
155that it change the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">iv</span></tt> on roughly the same period as the rerequest
156interval.  The reasoning for this is contained in the rationale.</p>
157</div>
158<div class="section" id="optimizations">
159<h1>Optimizations</h1>
160<p>The described optimizations are OPTIONAL for the tracker, but the
161corresponding client-side MUST be implemented by clients that support
162this extension.  These optimizations hobble the strength of the RC4
163encryption in order to improve tracker performance.  In the <a class="reference internal" href="#rationale">rationale</a>
164section we discuss why hobbling RC4 is reasonable and in many cases
165has negligible foreseen effect on security.</p>
166<p>For the purpose of these optimizations we assume that the tracker
167stores the tracker peer list for each infohash as a packed array that
168can be copied directly into the response.  We further assume that the
169packed array is reused many times and that with each request the
170tracker either returns the entire packed array or copies a single
171contiguous substring from the tracker peer list into the response.</p>
172<p>If the peerlist is represented and used as assumed then to improve
173randomness in the set of peers handed out by the tracker, it is
174RECOMMENDED that the tracker periodically reshuffle the peerlist with
175period similar to the rerequest interval.  After each reshuffle the
176tracker reperforms the operations described in this section.</p>
177<p>To reduce computation the tracker MAY cache the pseudorandom string
178generated by RC4 and reuse it as peers arrive and depart.</p>
179<p>The tracker MAY also cache the encrypted tracker peer list.  To
180support this the tracker MUST pass two additional parameters <em>i</em> and <em>n</em>
181each with 32-bit integer values, except the tracker MAY omit <em>i</em> and
182<em>n</em> when <em>i=0</em> and the <em>returned peer list</em> is the entire <em>tracker peer
183list</em>.  Whether the tracker returns <em>i</em> and <em>n</em>, the first 8 bytes of
184the RC4 psuedorandom string are reserved for obscuring <em>i</em> and <em>n</em>.
185We come back to this momentarily.  Decryption starts by XORing from
186<em>6i</em> bytes for ipv4 (or <em>18i</em> for ipv6) into the pseudorandom string
187after the discarded and reserved bytes.  Assuming that the tracker
188encrypted the tracker peer list starting from the first byte after the
189discarded and reserved bytes in the pseudorandom string then <em>i</em> also
190corresponds to the <em>ith</em> ip-port pair in the tracker peer list.</p>
191<p>So that the client and the tracker do not have to generate an
192arbitrarily long pseudorandom string to support large swarms, we
193assume the tracker bounds the length of the pseudorandom string and
194reports the length in ip-port pairs as the value to parameter <em>n</em><em>n</em>
195excludes reserved and discarded bytes.  We RECOMMEND that <em>n</em> be equal
196to the length of the tracker peer list or random but within constant
197factor of the longest peerlist returned by the tracker, whichever is
198smaller.  Thus the tracker encrypts the <em>jth</em> byte of the <em>ith</em>
199ip-port pair in an ipv4 tracker peer list by XORing with the byte
200<em>(6i+j)</em> <cite>mod</cite> <em>n</em> bytes into the pseudorandom string.</p>
201<p>Transmitting <em>i</em> and <em>n</em> as plaintext would significantly reduce the
202cost for an attacker to recover the pseudorandom string.  The tracker
203MUST XOR the value of <em>i</em> with the first 32 bits of the pseudorandom
204string.  The tracker then XORs <em>n</em> with the next 32 bits from the
205pseudorandom string (see Figure 1).</p>
206<div class="figure">
207<img alt="bep_0008_pseudo.png" src="bep_0008_pseudo.png" />
208<p class="caption"><strong>Figure 1:</strong> The first 768 bytes of the RC4 pseudorandom
209string are discarded.  The parameter <em>i</em> in the tracker response has
210value <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">x</span> <span class="pre">xor</span> <span class="pre">i</span></tt>.  The parameter <em>n</em> has value <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">y</span> <span class="pre">xor</span> <span class="pre">n</span></tt>.</p>
211</div>
212<p>We describe encryption in the following example for an ipv4 tracker peer
213list consisting of 3 ip-port pairs, and using an RC4 pseudorandom string
214of length <em>n=2</em>. <em>n</em> is small for purposes of illustration.  Also, for the
215purpose of illustration, the tracker returns only 2 peers at a time.</p>
216<pre class="literal-block">
217Given the following peer list
218(208.72.193.86, 6881), (209.81.173.15,14321), (128.213.6.8, 6881)
219
220As a packed array represented in hex it becomes
221
222d048c1561ae1d151ad0f37f180d506081ae1
223
224which we XOR with an RC4 pseudorandom string excluding discarded and
225reserved bytes, e.g.,
226
227a496e5f9b83e835013d42226
228
229to generate
230
23174de24afa2df5201bedb15d72443e3f1a2df
232</pre>
233<p>Because the RC4 pseudorandom string is shorter than the tracker
234peer list, we wrap to the beginning of the pseudorandom string.</p>
235<p>A tracker returning the first two peers would return the bencoded
236equivalent of:</p>
237<pre class="literal-block">
238peers=74de24afa2df5201bedb15d7, i=0, n=2
239</pre>
240<p>A tracker returning the second and third peer would return the
241bencoded equivalent of:</p>
242<pre class="literal-block">
243peers=5201bedb15d72443e3f1a2df, i=1, n=2
244</pre>
245<p>In each response the tracker includes additional parameters such as
246the rerequest <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">interval</span></tt> and the initialization vector <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">iv</span></tt>.</p>
247<p>The tracker response MUST remain a valid bencoded message.</p>
248</div>
249<div class="section" id="backwards-compatibility">
250<h1>Backwards Compatibility</h1>
251<p>Trackers that support obfuscation are identified in the .torrent file
252by the inclusion of an <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">obfuscate-announce-list</span></tt> which otherwise has the
253same semantics as the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">announce-list</span></tt> parameter.  Peers that do not support
254obfuscation simply ignore the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">obfuscate-announce-list</span></tt>.</p>
255<p>A client that is configured to use this extension should always send
256the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">sha_ih</span></tt> to any tracker supporting obfuscation.  The client
257SHOULD only contact trackers in the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">announce-list</span></tt> once the client
258has attempted all trackers in the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">obfuscate-announce-list</span></tt> and all failed.</p>
259<p>If a tracker that supports obfuscation wishes to allow legacy peers to
260connect to the tracker then the announce URL should appear in both the
261<tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">obfuscate-announce-list</span></tt> and the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">announce-list</span></tt>.</p>
262<p>If a tracker URL appears in both lists running on the same port, and
263the tracker failed to respond when selected from the
264<tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">obfuscate-announce-list</span></tt> then the client MAY treat the tracker in
265the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">announce-list</span></tt> as if it were temporarily unreachable and defer
266trying it until it has tried other trackers in the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">announce-list</span></tt>.</p>
267<p>Peers MUST never send both the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">info_hash</span></tt> and <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">sha_ih</span></tt> parameters
268in the same request, since that would defeat the purpose of the shared
269secret.</p>
270<p>Any peer that requests with a <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">sha_ih</span></tt> SHOULD implement Message
271Stream Encryption (MSE) <a class="footnote-reference" href="#mse" id="id1">[1]</a>.  Any peer returned from the tracker
272in response to a request with a <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">sha_ih</span></tt> SHOULD be assumed to
273support Message Stream Encryption.  We include these provisions
274because if a peer communicates with another peer without using MSE
275then the BitTorrent protocol is trivially identified from the first
276twenty bytes of the BitTorrent header and the <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">info_hash</span></tt> appears in
277plaintext as the next twenty bytes, hence also defeating the purpose
278of the shared secret.</p>
279<p>If the tracker does not know enough peers assumed to support MSE to
280return the desired number of peers then it MAY include peers that are
281not assumed to support MSE.  If a peer closes a connection in response
282to an encrypted header then the initiating peer SHOULD assume that the
283peer does not support MSE.  The initiating peer however SHOULD ONLY
284initiate unencrypted connections when all peers have been tried and
285those that support MSE fail to provide &quot;adequate performance.&quot;  We
286intentionally omit any definition of &quot;adequate performance.&quot;</p>
287</div>
288<div class="section" id="rationale">
289<h1>Rationale</h1>
290<p>This extension directly addresses a known attack on the BitTorrent
291protocol performed by some deployed network hardware.  By obscuring
292the ip-port pairs network hardware can no longer easily identify
293ip-port pairs that are running BitTorrent by observing peer-to-tracker
294communications.  This deployed hardware under some conditions disrupts
295BitTorrent connections by injecting forged TCP reset packets.</p>
296<p>This hardware was presumably deployed to get around BitTorrent
297Message Stream Encryption <a class="footnote-reference" href="#mse" id="id2">[1]</a>.  Peers implementing BitTorrent Message Stream
298Encryption obfuscate peer-to-peer connections by employing RC4
299encryption on every byte from the first byte transferred. BitTorrent
300Message Stream Encryption thus increases the difficulty for a device
301observing passing packets to identify BitTorrent peer-to-peer
302connections.</p>
303<p>By using the SHA-1 of the infohash, the tracker is able to identify
304torrents without sending the plaintext infohash and without requiring
305an additional prior exchange of a shared secret.  Where trackers now
306maintain mappings from infohash to the corresponding torrent's
307peerlist and other torrent-specific state, obfuscated trackers would
308need one additional mapping from <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">sha_ih</span></tt> to the torrent's state.
309Trackers may also cache the encrypted version of each torrent's
310tracker peer list, to increase computational performance at the
311expense of increasing memory footprint by a constant factor.</p>
312<p>The obfuscation method meets the following criteria:</p>
313<ul class="simple">
314<li>The entire plaintext of the peer list is not easily obtained even if
315an eavesdropper identifies one or more subsequent connections as
316using BitTorrent and the corresponding ip-port pairs appeared in the
317ciphertext of the tracker response.</li>
318<li>Even when a subsequent connection from a peer that has received a
319tracker response is observed by an eavesdropper, it is difficult to
320map the ip-port pair to specific ciphertext to verify that the
321connection is using BitTorrent.</li>
322</ul>
323<p>When the <a class="reference internal" href="#optimizations">optimizations</a> are used,</p>
324<ul class="simple">
325<li>Few computations are performed at request time.</li>
326<li>Encryption may be performed at the time a peer is added.
327The encrypted peer ip and port may be handed out hundreds of times.</li>
328<li>Security is minimally impacted.</li>
329</ul>
330<p>The objective is NOT to create a cryptographically secure protocol
331that can survive unlimited observation of passing packets and
332substantial computational resources on network timescales.  The objective
333is to raise the bar sufficiently to deter attacks based on observing
334ip-port numbers in peer-to-tracker communications.</p>
335<p>If a tracker observes a large number of tracker requests and responses
336and subsequent connections, it is possible to attack the encryption.
337RC4 is known to have a number of weaknesses especially in the way it
338is used with WEP <a class="footnote-reference" href="#borisov" id="id3">[2]</a> <a class="footnote-reference" href="#scott" id="id4">[3]</a> <a class="footnote-reference" href="#stubblefeld" id="id5">[4]</a>.  However, with
339tracker peer obfuscation, the number of bytes transferred between the
340tracker and a client is likely significantly smaller than transferred
341between a wireless computer and a basestation.  An attacker faces a
342much larger task in obtaining sufficient ciphertext to directly break
343the encryption.</p>
344<p>Hobbling the RC4 encryption by using a bounded-length RC4 pseudorandom
345string for small swarms is likely to have negilgible impact on
346security over any other encyption method since the pseudorandom string
347is probably equal to or longer than the plaintext and thus no part of
348it is repeated in the XOR except as peers arrive or leave the swarm.
349Thus on the timescales of rerequest intervals, nearly the same
350ciphertext is handed to every peer requesting the same infohash.
351Intercepting the same ciphertext multiple times provides no additional
352information to the attacker.  The attacker could correlate ip-port
353pairs in connections following tracker responses, but an attacker
354could do this regardless of the encryption method employed.
355Furthermore more direct methods of traffic analysis applied to
356peer-to-peer communication is available to network operators.</p>
357<p>For larger swarms, hobbling RC4 may simplify breaking the encryption
358since the same pseudorandom string is used repeatedly across the peer
359list.  Some study is in order taking into account that the tracker can
360periodically change intiailization vectors.</p>
361<p>We know from experience that periodically reshuffling peer lists on
362the order of the rerequest interval negligibly impacts tracker
363performance even with swarms containing millions of peers.  Generating
364a new pseudorandom string using RC4 on this same time interval is
365likely to incur negligible performance penalty because 1) RC4 is a
366small constant factor more expensive than a shuffle on an input string
367of equal length, 2) the generated pseudorandom string is only <em>n</em>
368ip-port pairs long where recommended <em>n</em> is within a small constant
369factor larger than the largest <em>returned peer list</em> and thus much
370smaller than the <em>tracker peer list</em> for large swarms, and 3) the cost
371of the XOR operation is lighter weight than performing a random
372shuffle.</p>
373</div>
374<div class="section" id="references">
375<h1>References</h1>
376<table class="docutils footnote" frame="void" id="mse" rules="none">
377<colgroup><col class="label" /><col /></colgroup>
378<tbody valign="top">
379<tr><td class="label">[1]</td><td><em>(<a class="fn-backref" href="#id1">1</a>, <a class="fn-backref" href="#id2">2</a>)</em> BitTorrent Message Stream Encryption
380(<a class="reference external" href="http://www.azureuswiki.com/index.php/Message_Stream_Encryption">http://www.azureuswiki.com/index.php/Message_Stream_Encryption</a>)</td></tr>
381</tbody>
382</table>
383<table class="docutils footnote" frame="void" id="borisov" rules="none">
384<colgroup><col class="label" /><col /></colgroup>
385<tbody valign="top">
386<tr><td class="label"><a class="fn-backref" href="#id3">[2]</a></td><td>Nikita Borisov, Ian Goldberg, and David Wagner. Intercepting
387mobile communications: the insecurity of 802.11. In ACM MobiCom 2001,
388pages 180-189. ACM Press, 2001.</td></tr>
389</tbody>
390</table>
391<table class="docutils footnote" frame="void" id="scott" rules="none">
392<colgroup><col class="label" /><col /></colgroup>
393<tbody valign="top">
394<tr><td class="label"><a class="fn-backref" href="#id4">[3]</a></td><td>Scott R. Fluhrer, Itsik Mantin, and Adi
395Shamir. Weaknesses in the key scheduling algorithm of RC4. In Serge
396Vaudenay and Amr M. Youssef, editors, Selected Areas in
397Cryptography 2001, volume 2259 of Lecture Notes in Computer
398Science, pages 1-24. Springer, 2001.</td></tr>
399</tbody>
400</table>
401<table class="docutils footnote" frame="void" id="stubblefeld" rules="none">
402<colgroup><col class="label" /><col /></colgroup>
403<tbody valign="top">
404<tr><td class="label"><a class="fn-backref" href="#id5">[4]</a></td><td>Adam Stubblefeld, John Ioannidis, and Aviel
405D. Rubin. A key recovery attack on the 802.11b wired equivalent
406privacy protocol (WEP). ACM Transactions on Information and System
407Security, 7(2):319-332, May 2004.</td></tr>
408</tbody>
409</table>
410<table class="docutils footnote" frame="void" id="id6" rules="none">
411<colgroup><col class="label" /><col /></colgroup>
412<tbody valign="top">
413<tr><td class="label"><a class="fn-backref" href="#id7">[5]</a></td><td><a class="reference external" href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119">http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119</a></td></tr>
414</tbody>
415</table>
416</div>
417<div class="section" id="example-python-code">
418<h1>Example Python Code</h1>
419<p>Request handling in a dummy tracker implementing tracker peer obfuscation:</p>
420<pre class="literal-block">
421from sha import sha
422from random import randint
423from struct import unpack
424from rc4 import rc4  # rc4(k) generates k RC4 pseudorandom bytes.
425
426rand = open(&quot;/dev/random&quot;,&quot;r&quot;).read
427rc4 = rc4()
428
429# tracker configuration
430MAX_PEERS = 100
431
432# per torrent state.
433infohash = sha(&quot;dummy_info&quot;).digest()
434pseudo = ''                        # pseudorandom RC4 string.
435num_peers = 1000                   # current swarm size.
436tracker_peer_list = rand(6) * num_peers
437obfuscated_tracker_peer_list = ''
438
439def