Once again, the Internet has patched around a failure, and information
resumes its flow. Thank you, tup!
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 03:54:56 + tup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/28/07, Scott Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to set up a free wireless service for those of my
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 03:33:46 +0200 Juliusz Chroboczek
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[I, Scott Bennett, wrote:]
I'm trying to set up a free wireless service for those of my neighbors
within range of a little wireless router I have. To keep things safe for
me and at least somewhat safer
Scott Bennett wrote:
I'm trying to set up a free wireless service for those of my neighbors
within range of a little wireless router I have. To keep things safe for
me and at least somewhat safer for them, I want to route all the outbound
connections from that router through tor using pf under
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 10:06:50 +0100 Mike Cardwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Scott Bennett wrote:
I'm trying to set up a free wireless service for those of my neighbors
within range of a little wireless router I have. To keep things safe for
me and at least somewhat safer for them, I want
Scott Bennett wrote:
If you set up something like that you're opening up all sorts of attacks
against the people who use your service. If they don't know that all of
their plain text traffic can be read and modified by, dodgy, exit
nodes, and almost certainly *will* be at some point...
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:19:26 +0100 Mike Cardwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Scott Bennett wrote:
If you set up something like that you're opening up all sorts of attacks
against the people who use your service. If they don't know that all of
their plain text traffic can be read and
Scott Bennett wrote:
If they use an Internet cafe, their traffic is subject to being
monitored. If they use Tor it is *also* subject to being modified.
If they go to a coffee shop or other location with free wireless
access, their traffic is also subject to being modified, but at *any
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 16:35:29 +0100 Mike Cardwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Scott Bennett wrote:
If they use an Internet cafe, their traffic is subject to being
monitored. If they use Tor it is *also* subject to being modified.
If they go to a coffee shop or other location with
Scott Bennett wrote:
[...]
Governments are incomparably more dangerous than any 13-year-old or
even ISPs. Also, given the number of teenagers who have cracked well
funded web servers, I'd say that said teenager is still not out of the loop
without tor.
[...]
Not using tor at all is far
On Monday 01 October 2007 16:35:29 Mike Cardwell wrote:
If you use Tor, you considerably increase the number and range of people
that could potentially attack you. You also make yourself a tastier target.
This is not a bad thing if you know how to deal with it. It *is* a bad
thing if you
You should not make traffic go transparently through tor, unless the
people using your network fully understand what tor is about, and what
are the associated security risks (such as exit nodes performing MITM
attacks on SSL certificates).
Thank you for your opinion, but it was not
I think this discussion brings up an interesting point, again.
Tor [b] changes [/b] the risks you are opened to.
It removes the risk of ISP's, search engines, and advertisers from
tracking your click stream, and being the receipt of a government
request for your online history. (Most people
I'm trying to set up a free wireless service for those of my neighbors
within range of a little wireless router I have. To keep things safe for
me and at least somewhat safer for them, I want to route all the outbound
connections from that router through tor using pf under FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE
13 matches
Mail list logo
