On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:46:12AM -0500, Erilenz wrote:
> This is one of those ideal/practical arguments. Idealistically, Tor
> would only have 3 hop circuits and those who want "simple circumvention"
> wouldn't use it. That doesn't make it the practical truth of what is
> happening though.
Even
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Marco Bonetti
wrote:
> DeepSec 2009 is on, this morning I gave the talk on new HTML5 features
> and how do they affect Tor browsing, if you're interested in the
> presentation with some sample code for the attacks go to
> http://sid77.slackware.it/.
> And keep bro
>
> My question is: do you really think it would help? If people are using
> Tor inappropriately (meaning they could get what they want with a
> simple anonymous proxy), what are the chances they're going to have it
> configured appropriately to reduce the bandwidth they use?
>
I don't want to wei
Thus spake Marco Bonetti (marco.bone...@slackware.it):
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello list,
> DeepSec 2009 is on, this morning I gave the talk on new HTML5 features
> and how do they affect Tor browsing, if you're interested in the
> presentation with some sample code
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Erilenz wrote:
> * on the Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 07:43:01AM -0500, Andrew Lewman wrote:
>
>>> That's fine, as long as you're assuming that people only use Tor when they
>>> need
>>> strong anonymity. As soon as you realise that people who don't need strong
>>> anon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello list,
DeepSec 2009 is on, this morning I gave the talk on new HTML5 features
and how do they affect Tor browsing, if you're interested in the
presentation with some sample code for the attacks go to
http://sid77.slackware.it/.
And keep browsing w
* on the Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 07:43:01AM -0500, Andrew Lewman wrote:
>> That's fine, as long as you're assuming that people only use Tor when they
>> need
>> strong anonymity. As soon as you realise that people who don't need strong
>> anonymity are using it as well, your point fails. Whether or
On 11/19/2009 04:47 AM, Erilenz wrote:
> That's fine, as long as you're assuming that people only use Tor when they
> need
> strong anonymity. As soon as you realise that people who don't need strong
> anonymity are using it as well, your point fails. Whether or not they *should*
> be doing so is
Tim Wilde wrote:
On 11/18/2009 4:17 AM, Jim wrote:
Google was actually the motivating factor in causing me to get serious
about overcoming whatever problem I had when I first tried to use Tor.
Although my concern at the time was more the ubiquity of
google-analytics. But still concerned about
* on the Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:08:10PM -0500, Marcus Griep wrote:
>> Yes, they should. However, just because people shouldn't be doing something
>> doesn't mean you should ignore the fact that they are.
>
> Responding to a deficiency in an area which Tor does not attempt to solve is
> a poor us
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:30 PM, moris blues wrote:
> So is it posssible to use my own exit node, in that case that nobody else
> then me can use it?
> Or that everybody can use it, but only a few Pages will be allowed to send
> from it?
> For example when i want to use the exitnode only for my
11 matches
Mail list logo
