Re: [tor-dev] Action items wrt prop224 onion address encoding (was Re: Proposition: Applying an AONT to Prop224 addresses?)

On 11 Apr (13:45:41), George Kadianakis wrote: > George Kadianakis writes: > > > Ian Goldberg writes: > > > >> On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 10:02:07AM -0400, David Goulet wrote: > >>> Another thing about this I just thought of. This AONT construction seems

Re: [tor-dev] Action items wrt prop224 onion address encoding (was Re: Proposition: Applying an AONT to Prop224 addresses?)

On 11/04/17 11:45, George Kadianakis wrote: > We basically add the canonical onion address in the inner encrypted > layer of the descriptor, and expect the client to verify it. I made this > feature optional in case we ever decide it was a bad idea. Is the version number also included in the

[tor-dev] RFC: porting torbrowser (was: Re: GNU Guix and Tor Browser Packaging)

Hi folks, as your trademarks team / person suggested to me I get in touch with the dev team of torproject. While I'm more involved in GNUnet, I work at the intersection of projects. Currently this means I'm involved in system integration. At Guix we are interested in working closer with projects

Re: [tor-dev] Action items wrt prop224 onion address encoding (was Re: Proposition: Applying an AONT to Prop224 addresses?)

George Kadianakis writes: > Ian Goldberg writes: > >> On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 10:02:07AM -0400, David Goulet wrote: >>> Another thing about this I just thought of. This AONT construction seems >>> wise >>> to use. But it's still not entirely clear to