Re: Tor uses swap?
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 10:13:00AM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote: swap /dev/sda9 /dev/urandom swap,cipher=aes-lrw-plain,size=256 Same solution as I use but with slightly different options. Mine are: cipher=aes-cbc-essiv:sha256,size=256,hash=sha256,swap The example on https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/TheOnionRouter/OperationalSecurity suggests no options other than 'swap'. I wonder if these are differences that make a difference. :) *** To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
Re: Tor server using Vista?
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 07:23:38AM -0500, Ringo Kamens wrote: This is certainly not adviseable because of the lack of security built into windows and the possible backdoors. Anonymity systems like Tor are designed to be resistant to bad nodes, even when the operator of the node is a bad guy. Working on this premise, how can the security weakness of Windows be sufficient justification for not running a Tor node on it? Certainly some degree of caution and careful monitoring would be advisable but this holds true when opening any public service. Running a Tor server on Vista seems like a very good idea, if only to provide the developers with feedback on how well it works. Steve -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: How do I respond to a specific post?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 10:41:16AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there a way to respond to a specific post in a thread-hierarchy? Yes. Your email client should do it for you but some fail to insert the proper headers. When replying to a message, you need to take the Message-ID of the original and put it in a In-Reply-To header of your message. Your Message-ID was [EMAIL PROTECTED], so my message will include a header: In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEjtB/tHGA1SKHYecRAg1WAJ9HvbZvxxktiEAWhpP+HcOjR8CVCQCcCmYb Ntn162gB15SbFZf8E7gw4JQ= =Crdu -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Did you see this?
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 07:16:49PM -0700, Eric H. Jung wrote: U.K. Government to force handover of encryption keys http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39269746,00.htm Yes, once this is passed encrypting storage with a passphrase becomes a pointless exercise in the UK unless you are prepared to spend time at Her Majesty's pleasure in order to protect your data. I think the best solution is to run privacy services in a different jurisdiction from where the operator resides. For example, my Tor node is located in Texas and runs from encrypted volumes that I manually mount from the UK after a reboot. I don't think the special agreements between these countries currently stretch to international demands for passphrases. No doubt this would rapidly change if the accusation was related to terrorism or possibly one of the other horsemen of the infocalypse. I'd be interested to hear other suggestions for circumventing RIPA.
