[tor-bugs] #28329 [Applications/Tor Browser]: Design TBA+Orbot configuration UI/UX

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#28329: Design TBA+Orbot configuration UI/UX
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
 Reporter:  sysrqb                               |          Owner:  tbb-
                                                 |  team
     Type:  enhancement                          |         Status:  new
 Priority:  Very High                            |      Milestone:
Component:  Applications/Tor Browser             |        Version:
 Severity:  Normal                               |     Resolution:
 Keywords:  tbb-mobile, ux-team, TBA-a3,         |  Actual Points:
  TorBrowserTeam201901                           |
Parent ID:                                       |         Points:
 Reviewer:                                       |        Sponsor:
                                                 |  Sponsor8
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------

Comment (by sysrqb):

 Replying to [comment:18 gk]:
 > Replying to [comment:16 antonela]:
 >
 > [snip]
 >
 > > For the unsuccessful scenario, we can take different paths:
 > >      a - Have a retry button
 > >      b - Suggest users to move to the Network Setting screen to config
 a Bridge
 > >      c - Move the user to the Network Setting screen with a message
 about what failed and some encouragement on how to fix it.
 >
 > c) seems to me the best option from those three. a) I doubt users
 understand why we just give them a "Retry" button in case things failed.
 And why should things get fixed just by tapping that button after the
 first try already failed?  b) we could do that but we would move the user
 to the network settings anyway if they decided to tap the link, so we can
 do c) right from the beginning...
 >

 Agreed. The three failure cases I foresee are:
   1. The device doesn't have internet connectivity
   1. The network is censoring Tor connections (and the user needs a
 bridge)
   1. The network is throttling the user's connection (and the user would
 be happier using a PT)

 We can provide different messages in these cases, but I think we can use
 the same message for 2) and 3). I suspect we can be a little smart here,
 too. If the user pressed the "connect" button without configuring a
 bridge/PT, then maybe we should automatically try one of the built-in
 bridges if bootstrapping fails. We can choose one or two at random from
 the list (probably obfs4). This isn't any worse than letting tor bootstrap
 directly (which is already did, and failed).

 >
 > There is no firewall ports configuration for Tor Launcher on start-up.
 While this is confusing to some users I think this is currently the right
 choice for mobile users, too. (I think we'll eventually drop that option
 altogether on desktop). See: #24452 for some discussion.

 I read through that ticket and some of the other mail. I think the
 argument "tor will eventually choose a working Guard node" is not very
 satisfying but I agree it is a much better solution than providing an
 option that confuses the users. I think it's worth not including the
 firewall options now.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/28329#comment:20>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online