Re:

2008-11-02 Thread zang meijun
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 2:42 PM, 臧美君 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > when choosing the middle nodes, it excludes the exit node and other middle > nodes first. sorry, i'm saying it excludes the exit node and the other middle nodes first in the same path > > and then exclude itself if it's a or. and

Re:

2008-11-02 Thread 臧美君
when choosing the middle nodes, it excludes the exit node and other middle nodes first. and then exclude itself if it's a or. and randomly choose a node in the running routers list which contains all those routers only if it's now running and valid and you think it's reliable enough. so actually i

Re:

2008-11-02 Thread John Brooks
The route selection algorithm takes this into account - nodes with exit traffic enabled are dramatically less likely to be used for non-exit traffic. Eliminating it entirely could theoretically harm anonymity by limiting the selection of middle nodes further and, more importantly, by telling 3rd pa

Future Development on Hidden Services

2008-11-02 Thread Karsten Loesing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi list, as some of you may know, there have been several improvements to hidden services lately. First, hidden services publish their descriptors to a distributed directory [1] consisting of currently 71 nodes. Second, hidden services may require cli

Re: Found a bug in documentation on the site?

2008-11-02 Thread Roger Dingledine
On Sun, Nov 02, 2008 at 08:05:40PM +0100, leandro noferini wrote: > I was making some experiments with fetchmail + tor and I found a strange > behaviour: at the address > https://wiki.torproject.org/noreply/TheOnionRouter/TorifyHOWTO/EMail It's quite possible. The torify wiki pages are written by

Re: exit nodes always also being middle nodes

2008-11-02 Thread Roger Dingledine
On Sun, Nov 02, 2008 at 08:50:11AM -0500, Erilenz wrote: > If you run as an exit node, it's my understanding that you also act as a > middleman node. Would it be possible, and would it be a good idea, to > add an option such that you only act as an exit node? > > It seems a bit of a waste to use p

Found a bug in documentation on the site?

2008-11-02 Thread leandro noferini
Ciao a tutti, I was making some experiments with fetchmail + tor and I found a strange behaviour: at the address https://wiki.torproject.org/noreply/TheOnionRouter/TorifyHOWTO/EMail there is this example: set no spambounce set no bouncemail poll provider plugin "socat STDIO SOCKS4A:127.0.0.1

Re: exit nodes always also being middle nodes

2008-11-02 Thread Drake Wilson
Quoth Erilenz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 2008-11-02 08:50:11 -0500: > If you run as an exit node, it's my understanding that you also act as a > middleman node. Would it be possible, and would it be a good idea, to > add an option such that you only act as an exit node? And then an attacker can guess

[no subject]

2008-11-02 Thread Erilenz
If you run as an exit node, it's my understanding that you also act as a middleman node. Would it be possible, and would it be a good idea, to add an option such that you only act as an exit node? It seems a bit of a waste to use potential exit bandwidth as middleman relaying bandwidth when exit b

Re: Problems starting relay

2008-11-02 Thread Geoff Down
Seems to be working now - with ORListenAddress 0.0.0.0:9001 . Thanks to those who actually tried to help with suggestions, correct or otherwise. GD On 2 Nov 2008, at 06:52, Jonathan Addington wrote: On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 1:39 AM, Geoff Down <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, I'm not mirroring th

Re: Tor From SVN on Weelky Basis

2008-11-02 Thread Jonathan Addington
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 2:20 AM, Roger Dingledine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 02, 2008 at 01:31:52AM -0500, Jonathan Addington wrote: >> I am running Ubuntu 7.10. Given the above, any reason not to recompile >> from the SVN weekly or so? For the sake of the network should I use an >> of

Re: Tor From SVN on Weelky Basis

2008-11-02 Thread Roger Dingledine
On Sun, Nov 02, 2008 at 01:31:52AM -0500, Jonathan Addington wrote: > I am running Ubuntu 7.10. Given the above, any reason not to recompile > from the SVN weekly or so? For the sake of the network should I use an > official stable or alpha release? Should be fine. We try to fix known problems in

Re: Problems starting relay

2008-11-02 Thread Jonathan Addington
(Likewise to "madjon", who posted > thoroughly bogus directions in response to your initial posting.) My sincere apologies. I didn't RTFM, only going off of my own experience. Apparently a bad idea. > Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG > *

Re: Problems starting relay

2008-11-02 Thread Scott Bennett
On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 06:39:31 + Geoff Down <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'm not mirroring the directory server (yet) so I assume I don't need >to worry about the directory port. >I did enable UPnP on my router (temporarily) and tried the Test button >in the Vidalia Relay setup page, and it