-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA384
Hey guys,
Today on Reddit I saw a post on /r/Tor that listed the number of relays by
version, which was pretty cool. While OP apparently loaded the information into
SQLite and selected the count, there's another way to do it:
sudo cat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
FYI: I just sent out the email bellow to ~160 relay operators - I hope
this results in some actual improvements.
It is a bit disappointing to see even torservers.net, DFRI, icetor,
Frenn vun der Enn, Calyx, Cymru in the recipients list.
The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
related feature requests/trac entries:
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/6947
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/6855
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/6856
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Hi Nusenu,
On 08/17/2014 01:08 AM, Nusenu wrote:
since you haven't updated most of your relays to address [1] released
on 2014-07-28 yet, I was wondering if everything is ok? collective
vacation?
Indeed. This is terrible and we will add some more trusted people's ssh
keys to the relays, but
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 08/17/2014 01:08 AM, Nusenu wrote:
since you haven't updated most of your relays to address [1]
released on 2014-07-28 yet, I was wondering if everything is ok?
collective vacation?
Indeed. This is terrible and we will add some more
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
I wanted to switch to unattended upgrades a long time ago, but the
story of our relay management is more complicated than that...
What were the specific problems with unattended upgrades?
There have been some threads about it on the mailing
There are some nice plugins for puppet, chef, ansible, etc.
Should save you a lot of time on software deployment!
Gr,
Nils
On August 17, 2014 3:35:14 PM CEST, Moritz Bartl mor...@torservers.net wrote:
On 08/17/2014 03:12 PM, Nusenu wrote:
Please consider unattended automated updates. Maybe
Let it never be said that public shaming doesn't work, I'll update our
exits tonight!
-Jason
On 08/17/2014 10:45 AM, Nusenu wrote:
FYI: I just sent out the email bellow to ~160 relay operators - I hope
this results in some actual improvements.
It is a bit disappointing to see even
On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 00:42:13 +0200, Sebastian Hahn m...@sebastianhahn.net
wrote:
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 00:42:13 +0200
From: Sebastian Hahn m...@sebastianhahn.net
To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Dynamic IP
Message-ID:
Hi Tim,
Sebastien, I run a relay on a machine that has an internal private IP, behind
a NAT router with a public IP.
In my experience, I need to specify the NAT router's public IP in the torrc,
otherwise tor doesn't include it in the router descriptor it submits to the
consensus.
This
actually after poking at this for a bit tonight it looks like newer
packages haven't been rolled out for deb.torproject.org repo's yet.
I'll be waiting for them first.
-Jason
On 08/18/2014 02:55 AM, ja...@icetor.is wrote:
Let it never be said that public shaming doesn't work, I'll update
our
0.2.4.23 has been on the repo for awhile now.
---
GPG/PGP Fingerprint
E129 722B A512 105C E8BE
4705 8046 EA48 2C82 1339
https://arlen.io/key
On Aug 17, 2014 11:40 PM, ja...@icetor.is wrote:
actually after poking at this for a bit tonight it looks like newer
packages haven't been rolled out for
yep you're correct, I should have taken note of the version numbers
better. All exits have been updated now.
-J
On 08/18/2014 03:48 AM, JT Allison wrote:
0.2.4.23 has been on the repo for awhile now.
---
GPG/PGP Fingerprint
E129 722B A512 105C E8BE
4705 8046 EA48 2C82 1339
Hello.
I'm not going to use the term Framily, Sprint can...nsfw.
Anyways, my close friend just set up a Tor node. I'm pretty sure I read
somewhere that the Family option in torrc is used so that nodes
administrated by the same person never make a circuit with each other,
which somehow protects
On 17/08/2014 9:11 PM, IceFish ThreeTwo wrote:
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Family option in torrc is
used so that nodes administrated by the same person never make a
circuit with each other, which somehow protects anonymity. Should my
friend and I put each other's fingerprints in
On 18/08/2014 4:26 p.m., Rex Wolf wrote:
On 17/08/2014 9:11 PM, IceFish ThreeTwo wrote:
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Family option in torrc is
used so that nodes administrated by the same person never make a
circuit with each other, which somehow protects anonymity. Should my
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 04:41:33PM +1200, Christian Gagneraud wrote:
On 18/08/2014 4:26 p.m., Rex Wolf wrote:
On 17/08/2014 9:11 PM, IceFish ThreeTwo wrote:
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Family option in torrc is
used so that nodes administrated by the same person never make a
Thanks for the info guys!(:
On Sunday, August 17, 2014, Paul Syverson paul.syver...@nrl.navy.mil
wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 04:41:33PM +1200, Christian Gagneraud wrote:
On 18/08/2014 4:26 p.m., Rex Wolf wrote:
On 17/08/2014 9:11 PM, IceFish ThreeTwo wrote:
I'm pretty sure I read
18 matches
Mail list logo
