shadowsocks / shadowsocks/shadowsocks-org

[SIP] Shadowsocks v2

Open
#157 51 comments 6 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Dominant language
HTML
Stars
1k
Forks
694
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

This issue is to discuss the changes we want in the next major revision of Shadowsocks protocol. Right now I've done some preliminary research based on the SOCKS6 RFC draft and I have a prototype security layer that provides forward secrecy (except for early data) and 1-RTT latency (or 0-RTT if used with TCP Fast Open).

So here're the things I have in mind (no particular order of importance, and most are optional):

  1. v2 protocol roughly based on SOCKS6 (which is still a moving target).
  2. New security layer with PFS and 0/1-RTT (w/o TFO). (related issue https://github.com/shadowsocks/shadowsocks-org/issues/54)
  3. Basic auth so we can officially support single-port multi-users without hacks.
  4. Native solution for DNS. (related issue https://github.com/shadowsocks/shadowsocks-org/issues/156)
  5. Better-defined semantics of proxy and VPN regarding errors and ICMP packets (related issue https://github.com/shadowsocks/shadowsocks-org/issues/144)
  6. Multiplexing over single TCP connection (similar to HTTP/2) to reduce latency when TFO is not possible.

Please feel free to discuss the changes.

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

No implementation files or tests are named. Start by reading the linked SOCKS6 RFC draft and the related issues #54, #156, and #144, then review the proposed protocol, security, authentication, DNS, error, and multiplexing changes. Done would require an agreed scope and protocol specification rather than a single implementation edit.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Domain
networking, security
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
20/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.