-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
If a middleman dies and the client gets to know this.
Can a running circuit be recovered by chosing a new middle-man and
informing the nodes down the chain about this?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://fir
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 19:31:02 -0800 "F. Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Roger Dingledine wrote:
>(snip)
>| Even if you hup your Tor rather than restarting it, you're still killing
>| all the circuits going through you...
>(snip)
>
>I didn't know this; since I'm using Kitsune-OR experimentally
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 07:31:02PM -0800, F. Fox wrote:
> Roger Dingledine wrote:
> (snip)
> | Even if you hup your Tor rather than restarting it, you're still killing
> | all the circuits going through you...
> (snip)
>
> I didn't know this; since I'm using Kitsune-OR experimentally in part,
> I'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Roger Dingledine wrote:
(snip)
| Even if you hup your Tor rather than restarting it, you're still killing
| all the circuits going through you...
(snip)
I didn't know this; since I'm using Kitsune-OR experimentally in part,
I've SIGHUP'ed it quite
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(snip)
|> Very true. This is one reason why I suggest only organizations (as
|> opposed to residential users) - who have the money, manpower, and other
|> resources to deal with legal issues - allow exits from any node they
I wrote:
+ On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 22:32:23 -0600 Jon McLachlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+wrote:
+>Scott Bennett wrote:
+>> On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:15:05 -0600 Jon McLachlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+>> wrote:
+>>
+>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+>>>
+ Another point is that without a tor s
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 22:32:23 -0600 Jon McLachlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>> On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:15:05 -0600 Jon McLachlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>
Another point is that without a tor server my home would be
Scott Bennett wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:15:05 -0600 Jon McLachlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another point is that without a tor server my home would be vulnerable to traffic
analysis and a further point is that a tor server is more safe than only a cli
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:15:05 -0600 Jon McLachlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Another point is that without a tor server my home would be vulnerable to
>> traffic
>> analysis and a further point is that a tor server is more safe than only a
>> client.
>>
>I thi
On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 07:43:06PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Every time the IP changes - or the relay even goes down and up (instead
> > of doing a -SIGHUP) - it breaks all the circuits running through your node.
>
> i've been killing the tor server via torctl stop before my disconnects
Hi,
> Every time the IP changes - or the relay even goes down and up (instead
> of doing a -SIGHUP) - it breaks all the circuits running through your node.
i've been killing the tor server via torctl stop before my disconnects and
restarting
via torctl start (i also restarted squid and privoxy).
Hi,
> | i got only a snail mail with a complaint about much spam, because i
> started with no closed port.
> | Since i closed port 25 i had no complaint since more than a year :-)
> | And with the proxy chaining of port 80 it should be fine for the next
> years.
> (snip)
>
> Odd; the default exit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another point is that without a tor server my home would be vulnerable to traffic
analysis and a further point is that a tor server is more safe than only a client.
I think this depends largely on what type of traffic analysis we're
talking about. Traffic analysis, j
Hi,
> (snip)
> | yes, they can't! At least for an exit gateway they receive
> | potentially tons of abuse complaints.
with a transparent proxy +ISP proxy they can get abuse complaints
about their proxy or maybe (with really good http header evaluation)
about my proxy. So the complaints are all ab
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid confusion,
Don't do that. It takes several hours before all the clients have your
current descriptor, if you keep changing it every two or so hours you
are only placing a burden on the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(snip)
| i got only a snail mail with a complaint about much spam, because i
started with no closed port.
| Since i closed port 25 i had no complaint since more than a year :-)
| And with the proxy chaining of port 80 it sho
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Olaf Selke wrote:
| Hans Schnehl wrote:
(snip)
| yes, they can't! At least for an exit gateway they receive
| potentially tons of abuse complaints.
Very true. This is one reason why I suggest only organizations (as
opposed to residential users) - w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(snip)
|
| it's because a moving target is harder to hit; it's more safe to
| change the IP number often. Another point is that states like germany
| do like IP numbers so much that they do data retention and therefore
| i
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 10:52:57PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > A word about obfuscation: If we run a tor node, we are as anonymous as Sta.
> > Claus
> > hiding behind sunglasses to our ISP's.
>
> that's clear; i'm using TOR as a mix with a transparent local http proxy
> which u
Hi,
> Hans Schnehl wrote:
> >
> > A word about obfuscation: If we run a tor node, we are as anonymous as Sta.
> > Claus
> > hiding behind sunglasses to our ISP's. If they want, they can see that we
> > are running a router/tor-node.
> > Actually they can hardly miss it.
>
> yes, they can't! A
Changing the IPs has the added benefit of helping users behind firewalls
that block tor.
Comrade Ringo Kamens
On Jan 7, 2008 5:26 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > If this or things like it continue people who see a need to block (or
> > otherwise treat differently) users from TOR will s
Hi,
> If this or things like it continue people who see a need to block (or
> otherwise treat differently) users from TOR will simply run probing
> hosts across the tor network, wasting TOR bandwidth, and applying
> their tor blocks to big proxy servers.
that would be useless because i do change
On Jan 7, 2008 4:52 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> that's clear; i'm using TOR as a mix with a transparent local http proxy
> which uses an ISP
> proxy as parent proxy, so that the exit traffic goes through two proxies and
> with several numbers
> in the X_FORWARDED_FOR header ;-)
> That's goo
Hi,
> A word about obfuscation: If we run a tor node, we are as anonymous as Sta.
> Claus
> hiding behind sunglasses to our ISP's.
that's clear; i'm using TOR as a mix with a transparent local http proxy which
uses an ISP
proxy as parent proxy, so that the exit traffic goes through two proxies
Hans Schnehl wrote:
A word about obfuscation: If we run a tor node, we are as anonymous as Sta.
Claus
hiding behind sunglasses to our ISP's. If they want, they can see that we are running a router/tor-node.
Actually they can hardly miss it.
yes, they can't! At least for an exit gateway they
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 09:19:11PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:55:36 +0100 Tom Hek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >> i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid
> > >> confusion,
> >
> > *Ten times per day?* Ple
Hi,
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:55:36 +0100 Tom Hek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >> i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid
> >> confusion,
>
> *Ten times per day?* Please tell us again why it is you're bothering
> to run a tor server if you also feel you hav
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Scott Bennett schrieb:
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:55:36 +0100 Tom Hek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>>> i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid
>>> confusion,
>
> *Ten times per day?* Please tell us again why it is
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:55:36 +0100 Tom Hek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid
>> confusion,
*Ten times per day?* Please tell us again why it is you're bothering
to run a tor server if you also feel you have to hide its existen
i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid
confusion,
i'm stopping my TOR server before and starting after the number
change.
But after the start TOR is very slow.
Is there a better way to tell the TOR server that the public IP has
changed?
Tor will detect it and repub
Hi,
i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid confusion,
i'm stopping my TOR server before and starting after the number change.
But after the start TOR is very slow.
Is there a better way to tell the TOR server that the public IP has changed?
Greets
31 matches
Mail list logo
