Disadvantages of multiple sys-whonix gateway

I have multiple AppVM open that are connected to sys-whonix and I need more control over my the connection for each AppVM. If the speed for one AppVM is too slow or is blocked, I’d like to restart tor / rebuild the connection but without affecting the other AppVM. I’m testing 4 different sys-whonix, each created from scratch with different bridges. and it seems to work fine.

However, according to the Multiple_Whonix-Gateway document, it states there are anonymity threats if more than one gateway like sys-whonix is used concurrently.

Relative to using a single sys-whonix, wouldn’t the problem be negated by using bridges? Also, wouldn’t this also mitigate cross-vm attack vectors?

No, I wouldn’t know why. Also interesting security discussions whether to use or not use bridges here:

No, I don’t see how this would change anything about side channel attacks.

For reference:

1 Like

I assumed each sys-whonix uses different virtual bridges which could mitigate this attack.

Unfortunately not. Whonix (and nobody else either) unfortunately has no perfect/direct fixes for host virtualization platform issues (side-channel attacks).

Well I guess it’s no worse than using a single sys-whonix, although I understand it’s best to avoid multi-tasking with multiple AppVM running in parallel.

[Imprint] [Privacy Policy] [Cookie Policy] [Terms of Use] [E-Sign Consent] [DMCA] [Contributors] [Investors] [Priority Support] [Professional Support]