Re: [tor-relays] Spam

[mick]

On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 09:41:53 +0100
kingqueen kingqu...@btnf.tw allegedly wrote:
 
  Had a similar situation. My take is - it is never too late to
  obfuscate. It does matter.
 
 Thank you! I have done. Random Person ROT13 xvatdh...@ogas.gj
 

I think that is the first time I have seen ROT13 used as a form of
email obfuscation.

I have seen images (usually PNG) being used - but then I have also
seen that ruined by the use of the mailto: tag around the image.

Mick 

-

 Mick Morgan
 gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B  72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312
 http://baldric.net

-



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

[tor-relays] Obfs + Non-obfs bridges

[Daniel Thill]

Can a single tor daemon instance provide both non-obfuscated and various other 
obfuscated transports? Right now, I have one instance that provides both obfs3 
and scramblesuit.  E.g.,

ServerTransportPlugin obfs3,scramblesuit exec /usr/local/bin/obfsproxy managed
ServerTransportListenAddr obfs3 MYIP:PORT
ServerTransportListenAddr scramblesuit MYIP:PORT2

I currently have another tor instance that runs a vanilla bridge configuration 
(no transports) on a different port.  Is this really necessary?  I couldn't 
find any documentation that address this.   Can non-transport clients use any 
bridge by simply not negotiating a transport?  There is a none pluggable 
transport type, but I figured that was for debugging purposes.

Thanks,
Dan

___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays