I separated out the backend database improvements to BridgeDB from the social
bridge distributor proposal. The former is finished and up for review and is
being submitted to potential funders; the latter is still a draft (though now
that some parts of the underlying crypto scheme and the threat mod
I separated out the backend database improvements to BridgeDB from the social
bridge distributor proposal. The former is finished and up for review and is
being submitted to potential funders; the latter is still a draft (though now
that some parts of the underlying crypto scheme and the threat mod
Greetings everyone!
I've been approached by I2P folks for adding ".i2p" address support in
Torsocks. Since what torsocks does can be applied for both Tor and I2P,
they felt that duplicating was not a good idea thus asking if merging
both systems make sense and is possible.
For now, it would only
Hi David,
adding .i2p support to torsocks is perfectly fine. It's a feature, not a
limitation. Who doesn't want to use it won't be annoyed by it. (Other
than man page and --help entry, but well, life is tough. :)
Someone else already said on this list some time ago "since torsocks is
agnostic abo
Il 11/2/13 5:13 PM, adrelanos ha scritto:
> Hi David,
>
> adding .i2p support to torsocks is perfectly fine. It's a feature, not a
> limitation. Who doesn't want to use it won't be annoyed by it. (Other
> than man page and --help entry, but well, life is tough. :)
I'd love also if someone pickup I2
Hi,
David Goulet wrote (02 Nov 2013 15:58:52 GMT) :
> For now, it would only be .i2p address support (like .onion). In
> torsocks, it's not that difficult to support both addressing.
I guess that people who use both I2P and Tor within Tails would be
very happy with this.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 5:58 PM, David Goulet wrote:
> For now, it would only be .i2p address support (like .onion). In
> torsocks, it's not that difficult to support both addressing.
Does I2P's SOCKS proxy work in a way that's similar to Tor? Other
proxies in I2P are protocol-specific — e.g., por
On 02 Nov (19:25:42), Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 5:58 PM, David Goulet wrote:
> > For now, it would only be .i2p address support (like .onion). In
> > torsocks, it's not that difficult to support both addressing.
>
> Does I2P's SOCKS proxy work in a way that's similar to Tor?
On 02 Nov (16:13:37), adrelanos wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> adding .i2p support to torsocks is perfectly fine. It's a feature, not a
> limitation. Who doesn't want to use it won't be annoyed by it. (Other
> than man page and --help entry, but well, life is tough. :)
>
> Someone else already said on th
Apparently, I failed to put the person in CC :).
On 02 Nov (13:47:56), David Goulet wrote:
> On 02 Nov (19:25:42), Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 5:58 PM, David Goulet wrote:
> > > For now, it would only be .i2p address support (like .onion). In
> > > torsocks, it's not that dif
I think i2p support makes sense. The only tricky part is what prereqs
that reuuires. For an individual building torsocks, they'll either have
or not have tor and have or not have i2p, and they can be detected, and
that's fine. For a packaging system, the package has to have
dependencies chosen,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 11/03/2013 06:58 AM, David Goulet wrote:
> Apparently, I failed to put the person in CC :).
I subscribed to tor-dev after talking with you :)
> On 02 Nov (13:47:56), David Goulet wrote:
>> On 02 Nov (19:25:42), Maxim Kammerer wrote:
>>> On Sat,
Hi,
as I have said on the tor-dev channel, if you guys want a unique IPv4
address on a virtual machine I still have both available for you good
people. It simply takes a gentle prod in the ribs for me to enable it and
you can use and abuse it in any way wish you need.
Regards,
Phill.
On 2 Nove
13 matches
Mail list logo
