Roger Dingledine wrote:
Kyle: this would be more useful if it didn't depend on a non-free vm
player. Do any of the free software variants of VMWare actually work
well enough for this approach?
I've been running Tor clients and servers under VMWare Server for a
while now. I do my secure brows
# free
total used free sharedbuffers cached
Mem: 98520 96772 1748 0 2220 5848
-/+ buffers/cache: 88704 9816
Swap:65528 58480 7048
# killall tor
# free
total used fre
le command-line - I imagine it would have looked worse if
I hadn't already done that.
So, essentially, tor was eating 90mb or so of RAM at that point.
Considering Olaf's hilarious 1.5gb example, I guess I was getting off
lightly.
-Ben
Scott Bennett wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2
Scott Bennett wrote:
Does LINUX have vmstat(8)? Or swapinfo(8)/pstat(8)? In any case,
it must have ps(1), which should give some sort of breakdown of what tor
is using.
It does have vmstat. I should point out, however, that vmstat shows
pretty much the exact same stuff that free does,
Scott Bennett wrote:
> Not AFAIK. It blocks exits for whatever ports you tell it to
block exits
> for. The sample torrc that comes with the package has several
example lines
> that you can uncomment or that you can simply use as examples for
syntax when
> writing your own ExitPolicy st
Scott Bennett wrote:
Okay, I wasn't aware of that. How many servers do you think might have
no uncommented ExitPolicy statements? As I pointed out before, the sample
torrc has "ExitPolicy reject *:*" uncommented, plus a few examples that are
commented. People who make no changes to the e
I don't really see a problem with it. It's still just as anonymous for
the server, it's just not as anonymous for the viewer. Honestly, if
anything, it's a good thing - it means you don't need to go install Tor
if you want to read anonymous people's posts, as long as you don't feel
the need t
TOR Admin (gpfTOR1) wrote:
Robert Hogan schrieb:
Do:
Spoof user-agent (is this necessary even with javascript disabled?) (browser)
I think, it is nessecary. Do this job in browser, because no proxy can
do it for SSL-encrypted stuff. And change the fake time by time.
I disagree. Don't do an
Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 01:41:18PM +0100, Lexi Pimenidis wrote:
Our exit node has already been used to send spam over Port 80, i.e.
using the yahoo web interface (there was a small discussion on that a
No. Spam has been sent via Yahoo. It's their problem, not Tor's.
Block
"tor -f my_alternate_torrc_file"
There ya go. :)
-Ben
Ben Stover wrote:
Can I start Tor with a second, individual "torrrc" configuration file?
In general I want to use the original torrc. But occasionally I want to use
e.g. specific exit nodes.
So I must use a modified torrc. Instead of alw
Alexander W. Janssen wrote:
I ain't no Windows-advocate but I find this argument a bit weak.
Nowadays all the modern operating systems have the same problems: To
much installed services by default, weak administration and the general
reluctance of users to pay attentions to security-updates and
Kraktus wrote:
I realise, of course, there are problems with this.
* Use of effort that could be spent other places
* Possible legal liability issues
* Cries of "you're blocking child porn, why not also block warez/hate
speech/freenet/political propoganda that I don't like"
* Every single pro
Kraktus wrote:
Warez is bad, but it hurts people's wallets, not innocent children, so
it's more of an economic crime than a crime against humanity. In
other words, blocking child porn is more worth the effort.
One could easily argue that the transmission of child porn doesn't hurt
children a
Kraktus wrote:
On 25/01/2008, Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I just want to know if there is a technically feasible way of
Use your brain. Packets have no EVIL bit to test for.
I'm pretty sure my suggestion is better than an RFC April Fools' Joke.
Actually, I disagree - the April F
A manually administered . . . centralized list? Because, call me crazy,
but a centralized list of "authorized routers" has some very, very
obvious flaws in it, both technical and security-related.
-Ben
Ron Wireman wrote:
It seems to me that we owe a lot the roughly 1,500 people who donate
t
Anon Mus wrote:
A fully global networked array of prime number testers, prime numbers
being the underlying basis for your public key encryption technology.
1 million decimal digit long primes achieved, the search for 10 million
digit primes underway.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Intern
Anon Mus wrote:
Ben,
Yes you are right factorising this is hard, but thats not what I've
been
suggesting. What if every time you generated a pair of keys you stored
the result somewhere!
Say you owned a huge network of say mil/gov computers which communicate
securely using sefl generated ro
Anon Mus wrote:
Ben,
I think you are using the purely theoretical numbers and applying them
to the problem as if they were reality.
As I remember the problem with the selection of primes for PKE is,
1. the seeding of the pseudo-random number generator
e.g. with a 16bit seed then only 65,000
Various comments on these, regarding why some of these are dubious ideas:
A. I had at least one connection to legal-preteen.com. I am willing
to take some chances of getting into trouble with the law for the sake
of avoiding internet censoship, but not to that end. Child pornography
and The G
Scott Bennett wrote:
It's
worth noting that the BSD users and even LINUX users don't have Windows
users' problem of always having to watch where they step to avoid falling
through security holes.
Yes, the great strength of Linux is that there are never massive
pervasive security holes, and ev
Wilfred L. Guerin wrote:
Even worse, you read FCC Part 15 rules and ask "why would I WANT it to
ACCEPT INTERFERENCE??"
You may want to read
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/english/electronics_elect_eng/1105076-device_must_accept_any_interference_received.html
for information on what "accept interfe
As I understand it, there's still a problem here - Tor thinks it's
listening on port 9001, so it'll advertise to the directories that it's
waiting on port 9001. Which obviously won't work all that well if they
have to connect to port 80.
Here's what the relevant section of my torrc looks lik
They're hidden in the sense that their physical location is a secret.
They can be listed on other hidden Tor services (or even on normal
webpages) and accessed like normal, but there's theoretically no way to
track down who exactly is providing the service (with the same set of
guarantees as
Grant Heller wrote:
Thank you for replying, Ben.
Can (the concept of) a hidden service be simplified to that of any
arbitrary protocol? Reconfigure an application to point to Tor instead
of the Internet and if the hidden service exists, the application will
communicate normally?
No prob.
Does your allocator actually return memory to the OS? Many don't, and in
my (admittedly brief) look through the source, I don't remember seeing a
custom allocator.
If it doesn't return memory to the OS, it'll just sit at its maximum
allocated size for all eternity, despite not using much of
I will admit that I'm not quite sure what the fear is with this -
reformatting it makes sense in case they installed evil software, but
there's no reason to burn it or securely wipe it or whatever if you
think that's all that's wrong with it.
I suppose they could technically have installed a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok so they will come back with more than just child porn... thats when we have
to draw the line!
"Yeah, so we disabled child porn like you asked, but we're not willing
to do anything about piracy, death threats to government officials,
cybercrime, or that mob ring ru
Or perhaps you're running Tor under VMWare? It turns out VMWare is
absolutely awful at keeping the system clock sane, and it can easily
create weirdnesses like this.
-Ben
Florian Reitmeir wrote:
Hi,
/var/log/tor/log after the crash?
Nothing unusual as far as I can see:
Jul 03 06:25:34
Of what reason don´t the same apply on the internet? One packet sent,
then wait a couple of seconds for it to reach desitination and the
answer packet returns, then next packet and so on. In my imagination,
only loading a non graphic website, or sending this email to the list
would take for h
I am having some trouble setting up MyFamily properly. I've found my
fingerprint without any issue - it looks like "DD91 7584 0D14 450F A3F9
482C 22AC 83B8 D861 E802" - but when I try to add it to the torrc in the
obvious way:
MyFamily DD9175840D14450FA3F9482C22AC83B8D861E802
I get the foll
Maschtaler wrote:
Hi Ben,
Ben Wilhelm wrote on 27.12.2006 23:11:
I am having some trouble setting up MyFamily properly. I've found my
fingerprint without any issue - it looks like "DD91 7584 0D14 450F A3F9
482C 22AC 83B8 D861 E802" - but when I try to add it to the torrc in the
Robert Hogan wrote:
* From a common-sense, peace-of-mind point of view, is running an exit-node
strictly for co-located servers? Does anyone here run one at home? If so,
have you had second thoughts?
I run one at home, but it's on a dedicated IP, within a virtual machine.
I wouldn't want t
xiando wrote:
I think this is a valid point. I ran an exit-node for a short while at home
without thinking too much about it. The huge amount of traffic I was
attracting (even within minutes of booting up) made me shut it off for the
sake of personal convenience, but I don't think I will ever go
33 matches
Mail list logo
