Introduction
AirTor seeks to enhance the Tor (The Onion Router) network through on-chain incentives to foster broader adoption of secure network relay protocols. This review delves into AirTor’s innovation, architecture, code quality, product roadmap, usability, team, and overall potential.
Innovation
AirTor introduces a novel approach to the Tor network by incentivizing relay node participation through its native cryptocurrency, ATOR (AirTor Token). The key innovation lies in the Proof of Uptime (PoU) mechanism, which rewards relay nodes based on their uptime and availability. This mechanism sends specialized PoU packets, essentially Tor packets, to verify the active status of relays, thereby ensuring continuous and reliable participation in the network.
Architecture
The architecture of AirTor is built on Tor’s foundational encryption standards, ensuring privacy and independence from ISPs. The network consists of low-power, specialized relay nodes that encrypt and decrypt web packets, contributing computational power and increasing routing permutations. AirTor’s architecture includes several key components:
- AirTor Relay: Dedicated hardware for Tor routing, designed to be interoperable with the PoU framework.
- AirTor Router Hotspot: A handheld device that routes all web traffic through Tor without complex configurations, enhancing accessibility for non-technical users.
- Transition to LoRa: Plans include integrating Long-Range Radio (LoRa) to provide an additional layer of physical independence from traditional ISPs.
AirTor Code Quality
AirTor’s code quality is adequate, but there is room for improvement. The project has released open-source code and instructional architecture for building Tor Routers using commonly available microprocessors. Continuous updates and community feedback will be crucial in refining the codebase and ensuring robust performance and security.
Product Roadmap
AirTor has a clear product roadmap:
- Q3 2023: Launch of the AirTor Router.
- Q1 2024: Introduction of the AirTor Relay.
- Future Plans: Transition to LoRa technology for enhanced privacy and independence. The roadmap demonstrates a strategic approach to expanding the AirTor ecosystem and scaling its network.
Usability
AirTor prioritizes user-friendliness, particularly for non-technical users. The AirTor Router Hotspot enables easy connection to the Tor network via Wi-Fi, eliminating the need for complex scripting. The dedicated AirTor Relay hardware simplifies participation in the network, allowing users to contribute to web anonymity with minimal technical knowledge.
Team
The development team behind AirTor is relatively inexperienced, which poses particular challenges. However, the project’s focus on hardware rather than software may mitigate some of these concerns. Building a more seasoned team and leveraging community expertise will be essential for the project’s long-term success.
Conclusion
AirTor presents a compelling vision for the future of secure network relay protocols. By incentivizing participation through ATOR and introducing user-friendly hardware solutions, AirTor has the potential to enhance the Tor network’s resilience and accessibility significantly. While the code quality and team experience present areas for improvement, the innovative approach and strategic roadmap position AirTor as a promising player in decentralized privacy and security solutions.
Initial Screening | |||
Keep researching | |||
Does this project need to use blockchain technology? | Yes | ||
Can this project be realized? | Yes | ||
Is there a viable use case for this project? | Yes | ||
Is the project protected from commonly known attacks? | Yes | ||
Are there no careless errors in the whitepaper? | Yes | ||
Project Technology Score | |||
Description | Scorecard | ||
Innovation (Out Of 11) | 9 | ||
How have similar projects performed? | Good | 2 | |
Are there too many innovations? | Good | 2 | |
Percentage of crypto users that will use the project? | 6% – 10% | 3 | |
Is the project unique? | Yes | 2 | |
Architecture (Out of 12) | 10 | ||
Overall feeling after reading whitepaper? | Good | 2 | |
Resistance to possible attacks? | Good | 2 | |
Complexity of the architecture? | Easy | 2 | |
Time taken to understand the architecture? | Less than 20 min | 2 | |
Overall feeling about the architecture after deeper research? | Medium | 2 | |
Has the project been hacked ? | No | 0 | |
Code Quality (out of 15) | 13 | ||
Is the project open source? | Yes | 2 | |
Does the project use good code like C,C++, Rust, Erlang, Ruby, etc? | Yes | 2 | |
Could the project use better programming languages? | No | 0 | |
Github number of lines? | More than 10K | 1 | |
Github commits per month? | More than 10 | 2 | |
What is the quality of the code? | Good | 2 | |
How well is the code commented? | Good | 1 | |
Overall quality of the test coverage? | Outstanding | 2 | |
Overall quality of the maintainability index? | Good | 1 | |
When Mainnet (out of 5) | 5 | ||
When does the mainnet come out? | Mainnet ready | 5 | |
Usability for Infrastructure Projects (out of 5) | 5 | ||
Is it easy to use for the end customer? | Yes | 5 | |
Team (out of 7) | 5 | ||
Number of active developers? | 5+ | 2 | |
Developers average Git Background? | Intermediate | 1 | |
Developers coding style? | Outstanding | 2 | |
Total Score (out of 55) | 47 | ||
Percentage Score | |||
Innovation | 16.36% | ||
Architecture | 18.18% | ||
Code Quality | 23.64% | ||
Mainnet | 9.09% | ||
Usability | 9.09% | ||
Team | 9.09% | ||
Total | 85.45% |