From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms8.migadu.com with LMTPS id mBeXDjravGUHggAAe85BDQ:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 13:04:10 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2.migadu.com with LMTPS id mBeXDjravGUHggAAe85BDQ (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 13:04:10 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=lassieur.org header.s=fm2 header.b=XQkhC8+3; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm3 header.b="C Z/IYfu"; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1706875450; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=neqwsNEYl2taixKVNMthnXZIUfJ69VuIDwIpxV4rY3m0X1oqe/+7tnPCPZkG7e9Ox6nhy0 EKrQkkEUG35XicDoxp6RuxvfMUHFd8SI2J/IzXLoIBk1GujH7xsWFeHM1MFptwZT1epJEb VCzyDMfWC27IZrr4IYPfmTtnLa3X77YZneNXbXMG+2/LtSYnDlVnLsD88MTguc/3ohGAN7 zlmQw1sidBVzl/OaLIz63JBS2aytApkyDabeBlE11KmzjFYbJ/L6udC6iw8NBQhvYIECfd CgkT5V8KlDTJFpbp3YX4L1Z6C/4Ex+tYLe5BgcjbeDqiD0sfvaR9Rf3Num7r+g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=lassieur.org header.s=fm2 header.b=XQkhC8+3; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm3 header.b="C Z/IYfu"; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1706875450; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=BvRsABzaAY4BAI7cHYzRhAGf8lip63X5xC9EH5ygNCY=; b=CvjvxLmT7iOXq7LM1rdfwh3m6MZUxLN/y9+hrUFUHbfF4XY/Ccll+1sa7suQlLvdPQ0NGt KH3BiTMF15NXIMdc/bZSN4vMd9hikWSbW4aKHR9ikcZK/vpLEPSPsLm4nIi1lwrtNpsBAg o6FeMZeaspCn89DkssVSOJgAtv7F0cBFpHD9sHVpuTKg8++OU1aLUf6jWk8QaT2mWj6GoZ NqIVTx/LPQvrxKzRA/m+FHAYnYCKkwQJV+LwZ+ZDT/QIi69XFM2vi3YDH8MFKShVW5aTrL b44a4KQbMaCTuA1opWBMAbmDDKm8q8ylGv5wL94s/b3YgeQaysnspZjsnjrVOw== Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D1CD73119 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2024 13:04:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVsGw-0000Fb-I1; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 07:03:54 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVsGu-0000FT-Ey for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 07:03:52 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVsGu-0005WL-4L for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 07:03:52 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rVsH4-0001Du-Fc for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 07:04:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#68577] [PATCH v2 2/2] gnu: Add mullvadbrowser. Resent-From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Lassieur Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 12:04:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 68577 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: =?UTF-8?Q?Andr=C3=A9?= Batista Cc: Mark H Weaver , 68577@debbugs.gnu.org, Jonathan Brielmaier , Ian Eure Received: via spool by 68577-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B68577.17068754324684 (code B ref 68577); Fri, 02 Feb 2024 12:04:02 +0000 Received: (at 68577) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Feb 2024 12:03:52 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43796 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rVsGu-0001DU-5q for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 07:03:52 -0500 Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:60173) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rVsGs-0001DD-1G for 68577@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 07:03:51 -0500 Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.48]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 721FE5C0126; Fri, 2 Feb 2024 07:03:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 02 Feb 2024 07:03:33 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lassieur.org; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1706875413; x=1706961813; bh=BvRsABzaAY4BAI7cHYzRhAGf8lip63X5xC9EH5ygNCY=; b= XQkhC8+31l4Thxt0PteP3pBUdyaxTVdHCzPuoRU3TsUdzS+79ugihkx5S0+o0oP8 cQoPWzKJNPPqQ4thHXjV38kxkl/0UETHpHLvsDEq1Feew0HXHCZDhh5yb12vIrJv JR0GjiMWaq//iVIo0NRQzQPHSTbYF8t/zml3eTQOk+2LLZGlNKKxKvCCDbw6E3t9 pd05FF2V0Y6unR/RDqJ546XFqVf70N+gakkRXV2rjoS9l/6HA8UdOX4eQX9VMLU7 PuPTS3gYgKhIHR6EbYW8VTgnI8ngZpja9ASpCFsNQbR3ScKqoDP4YaG+BzyvCmyI W8ORLf5y8v+zoWuPycMnDw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1706875413; x= 1706961813; bh=BvRsABzaAY4BAI7cHYzRhAGf8lip63X5xC9EH5ygNCY=; b=C Z/IYfuPfodsAQrXySGnwGs4JsbnDblCpuUlLVVJguzjKh1d+aumOokD1TKCE5DGe oAxM3YVk/ERzd7kGKZZPCObYeT+wwDFAuSgH7JX1b1oMgyaY0KPKCjtl2X6heCHo ZRFuWbzKQ/y4L6E6EHD4Q7xSZ23VkkvaVYcF+C2DxeI6Je07IyNWyWwsD8C2/1DP fRUbUIJtzhkHfaJZ79HMoR9imMuMDvlEzGmCt/TPo9OjnHj38hzObLeXxtBFvTap tW2huk4wi156obuxXqyMDbCV+M3+pHQ7225vghP4lA9QlZ0KVLF3HTKTZV/FGzrJ U4/DiQNU1YOEhBbuH5eGw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvkedrfedugedgfeegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgfgsehtqhertddtreejnecuhfhrohhmpeevlhor mhgvnhhtucfnrghsshhivghurhcuoegtlhgvmhgvnhhtsehlrghsshhivghurhdrohhrgh eqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepgeekheefffdtfeffueevkefgfffhtddugfdugeeugeev gfduteffudfgfefhjedunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrg hilhhfrhhomheptghlvghmvghntheslhgrshhsihgvuhhrrdhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i4c21472a:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 2 Feb 2024 07:03:32 -0500 (EST) From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Lassieur In-Reply-To: ("=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=C3=A9?= Batista"'s message of "Thu, 1 Feb 2024 22:52:52 -0300") References: <994cb541ca6331c8e69c9be725c1fce72bd8b08f.1706222112.git.clement@lassieur.org> <87jznp8og1.fsf@lassieur.org> Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 13:03:30 +0100 Message-ID: <87ttmrcbu5.fsf@lassieur.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Scanner: mx10.migadu.com X-Spam-Score: -5.77 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 3D1CD73119 X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -5.77 X-TUID: kAySDgGIANro On Thu, Feb 01 2024, Andr=C3=A9 Batista wrote: > Hi guix, > > qua 31 jan 2024 =C3=A0s 17:20:14 (1706732414), clement@lassieur.org envio= u: >> >> (...) >>=20 >> To make things clear : our goal is for our Tor Browser users to be in >> the same bucket as upstream Tor Browser users, and for our Mullvad >> Browser users to be in the same bucket as Mullvad Browser upstream >> users. > > I think we should aim for that and be as close as possible but no closer. > > What I mean is that we should not strive for bug for bug compatibility. > Suppose there's a new torbrowser release and then, one week later, a > new noscript release. Should we then freeze noscript and wait for a new > torbrowser? Should we create a new noscript/torbrowser package? What > about other inputs? The build system? > > I don't know if it's at all possible to guarantee that guix users will be > on the same bucket as other GNU/Linux users of the upstream binaries, but > I guess it will be way too much work to even try it. That's what I meant > way back when I suggested the 'torbrowser-unbundle' name and said that > if one wants the strongest possible guarantee of anonymity, one should > then use the upstream binaries (they are sure the largest anonymity > bucket). > > In that sense, having torbrowser on guix is a sure improvement over using > tor+icecat. All guix users in this scenario are on a bucket that is easy > to tell apart (not even the user-agent string is the same). So we've made > the work needed to tell apart guix users from other GNU/Linux users way > harder. > > From now on, what I suggest is that we think on the economics of getting > each step closer to be indistinguishable from upstream. Are the proposed > changes easily maintainable? Do they substantially increase the burden on > guix build servers? Is the change making the work of those trying to > deanonymize surely more expensive? > > If the burden is heavy on us but the proposed changes do not make the > work of those intent on deanonymizing way harder/more expensive, it's > unreasonable to apply them. > > Thoughts? Yes I agree. Perfect is the enemy of good. I was thinking about changes that don't make it more difficult to maintain, e.g. using the same build-options as upstream (when it makes sense). I don't think being late on a noscript update will change our bucket anyways, and I know we can't know for sure. (For the strongest possible anonymity, people should use Tails...)