There seems to be a consensus toward building a web of trust.
Thinking about it again, I don't like much the direction it is going.
I see tor as a web of untrust actually. I never much appreciated the power
already granted to
directory authorities. I want to be able to use any relay (I choose) as
Hi list,
With the recent warning by nusenu about the malicious relays and the
proposal to work around the issue , ive been wondering:
Did anyone ever try to convince some isp to put a low-cap tor relay on the
router of their 'unlimited bandwidth' clients?
Or has there been any discussion on that
I have nothing against this proposal although im not sure it would be that
much efficient.
Especially, how does it make relay operations 'less sustainable' or 'more
risky'?
@Imre Jonk: why would you want - and why should you have - an higher
probability?
Sounds to me the ideal case is an infinite
Basically, assuming relays communicate between them over ipv4, guards
and exits supporting ipv6 would allow clients with ipv6-only
connectivity to join the network, and establish connections to
ipv6-aware servers.
So I guess it makes sense if you relay ever gets the guard flag.
On Wed, Jun 19, 201
ND policy on the firewall).
>
>
>
> So regardless of Full v6 support, or v6 only support [both are needed], at
> the very least some good logging to say if its failing would be great 😉
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* tor-relays *On Behalf
> Of *Charly Ghislain
> *Se
many other reasons, the ip/interface/port you are listening to might be
very different than the one you publicly advertise. Lets keep it that way.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 12:41 AM Charly Ghislain
wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> Last reply from s7r on jake Visser' issue included a link to an op
Hi list,
Last reply from s7r on jake Visser' issue included a link to an open issue
waiting for a consensus on a mailing list:
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/29570
Not sure if teor implied the dev mailing list or this one, but maybe
gathering feedback from operators is a good id
Hi all,
Indeed my relay now has the ReachableIp6 flag.
I updated the wiki to mention this delay.
Thanks again,
Charly
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 4:05 PM Charly Ghislain
wrote:
> ok, maybe i haven't waited that long. I will put it back and come back to
> you in a couple of days.
>
so the network configuration
> is fine, at least.
>
> Regards,
>
> Blicky.
>
> On 2019-02-23, Charly Ghislain wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > My tor relay has got the UnreachableIpv6 flag set once i mentionned an
> > OrPort with my ipv6 address.
> &
Hi all,
My tor relay has got the UnreachableIpv6 flag set once i mentionned an
OrPort with my ipv6 address.
>From what i can tell, my server is reachable over ipv6, and can contact the
directory authorities through ipv6 (following the instructions found there:
https://trac.torproject.org/projects
`https://atlas.torproject.org (yes this is the old domain but less to type
;)` seems a lot longer than `metrics.torproject.org` to me :p
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:37 PM nusenu wrote:
>
>
> dns1...@riseup.net:
> > It would be interesting to know some statistics, and to know which
> > are the most
We have seen ip addresses posted on this list recently. They were coming
from the logs.
I think it would be nice if the software powering this list could scramble
all ips in message bodies.
At least having to reformat them in order to avoid that filter would give
the poster some time to realize if
>
> Few people use their Tor nodes as mail servers, and regardless, it's a
> bad idea to run any other services on the same IP/hardware as a Tor node.
> The OP was using @posteo.de which is a common email provider, regardless.
True, but the link -> -> may be easier for someone with relevant
If it wasn't, would posting the ip address of a client connecting to a
bridge in here compromise her anonymity and/or allow one to
firewall/blacklist her traffic?
Im assuming one could guess the ip address of the running bridge based on
the poster email address.
On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 2:57 PM wro
If my relay running at ip A is also available, although not advertised, at
ip B, should I bother with MyFamily settings?
This may happen if the relay is running as service in a docker swarm.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Dmitrii Tcvetkov
wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 21:02:42 +0100
> Sebastia
15 matches
Mail list logo
