The second some kind of automation starts kicking
in, scanning for hidden services, I think this is a Bad Idea.
scanning 36^16 possible hidden services is out of discussion...
It's actually 32^16. Considering 10k nodes processing 1 per
second would only take 3.9 trillion years to search port
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 20:22, Peter McCann
mc...@freeovernetfoundation.org wrote:
If not, what do people think about setting up such an index?
It seems like it might be very useful for those operators of
hidden services that want to expose them to a wider audience
than just the people
On Fri, 7 Jan 2011 13:22:58 -0600
Peter McCann mc...@freeovernetfoundation.org wrote:
On the website describing how to set up a hidden service
I saw a mention of a (hypothetical?) Hidden Services Wiki
where pointers to hidden services are stored. Does such a wiki exist?
If so, where can I
Hi,
Am 07.01.2011 22:26, schrieb Andrew Lewman:
It's possible one could create a search engine that
crawls every possible .onion hostname on common tcp ports (80, 443,
8080, 8443). Over long periods of time, this may find many hidden
services.
I haven't given it much thought yet, but I like
On the website describing how to set up a hidden service
I saw a mention of a (hypothetical?) Hidden Services Wiki
where pointers to hidden services are stored. Does such a wiki exist?
If so, where can I find it?
There could be rumors on the internet(s) that there may be a
mediawiki-based
Nils Vogels wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 20:22, Peter McCann
mc...@freeovernetfoundation.org wrote:
If not, what do people think about setting up such an index?
It seems like it might be very useful for those operators of
hidden services that want to expose them to a wider audience
6 matches
Mail list logo
