Just imagine what anyone from Scandinavia or Europe might interpret it as
rather than just North Americans who have predilection for dramatic language.
Do you really have to excite yourself?
>
> I think the obvious terms were being used - Freenet was an application
> for example.
>
> "private"
On 05/14/2014 09:07 PM, grarpamp wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> -- --
>> world
>
>> That "ovpn" part on the left is easily detected by any party in the
>> middle doing
>
> No. Understand the diagram. It is not detectable by anyone
> between torcli and to
to list, not me.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mirimir
Date: Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:58 PM
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Fwd: [tor-relays] Ops request: Deploy OpenVPN
terminators
On 05/14/2014 09:07 PM, grarpamp wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> --
Tried it on FreeBSD 8, 'works for me' so far. If there's something in
particular needing excercised bug the list. And if any of those
horribly old platform patches I suggested are getting in the way,
feel free to not carry them.
Here is the current 'unclean' output here, some of which may be
local
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> They do not care about solely Tor, that is just one of many many things
> they block to restrict the majority of people from accessing 'free'
> (ahem) content.
I've said multiple times this does not concern gfw or bootstrapping
access to t
If the poor image was caused by dramatic and sensational language appealing to
imagination then cool factual language would avoid that.
? private sites ?
? private net ?
--
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproje
On 5/15/14, I wrote:
> If the poor image was caused by dramatic and sensational language appealing
> to imagination then cool factual language would avoid that.
> ? private sites ?
> ? private net ?
I think the obvious terms were being used - Freenet was an application
for example.
"private" is
On 5/15/14, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On 5/15/14, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
>> Zenaan Harkness:
>>> -> Illuminet
>>> -> so we are the Illuminetti ? :)
>>
>> Please not. Iluminati is another negatively perceived term surrounded by
>> conspiracy theories.
>
> Thus the smiley :)
>
> I guess there ar
On 5/15/14, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> Zenaan Harkness:
>> -> Illuminet
>> -> so we are the Illuminetti ? :)
>
> Please not. Iluminati is another negatively perceived term surrounded by
> conspiracy theories.
Thus the smiley :)
I guess there are others of a similar ilk:
* Club of Rominet
* Koo
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 4:55 PM, anonym wrote:
> 14/05/14 21:46, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>> Hi, all!
>>
>> We're going to be releasing Tor 0.2.4.22 soon. I have a candidate
>> source bundle at [...]
>
> Unless there's a lot of unexpected problems, am I right to assume that
> there's a good probabil
On 05/14/2014 04:21 PM, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> Zenaan Harkness:
>> On the humour front:
>>
>> Dark net
>> -> Light net
>
> Better.
How about "BeyondNet"? That's from _Fire Upon the Deep_ by Vernor Vinge
(1991). He called it "galactic Usenet" ;)
--
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.to
Zenaan Harkness:
> On the humour front:
>
> Dark net
> -> Light net
Better.
> -> Illuminet
> -> so we are the Illuminetti ? :)
Please not. Iluminati is another negatively perceived term surrounded by
conspiracy theories.
> On a new brand:
> How about the Free Speech Network ?
Okay.
> The
14/05/14 21:46, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> Hi, all!
>
> We're going to be releasing Tor 0.2.4.22 soon. I have a candidate
> source bundle at [...]
Unless there's a lot of unexpected problems, am I right to assume that
there's a good probability for 0.2.4.22 to be released before 8th of
June (the da
Hi everyone!
Took me a while to do it but there it is! For those not following
torsocks development, this is a status report of the project.
As of April 4th 2014, the release candidate 7 was released. With that
release, the main code is now on torproject.org which is now the
official upstream of
Hi, all!
We're going to be releasing Tor 0.2.4.22 soon. I have a candidate
source bundle at
http://www.wangafu.net/~nickm/volatile/tor-0.2.4.22.tar.gz
This is not the final Tor 0.2.4.22 release. It is a testing bundle
that I made today. I'm not planning to add any more code to it,
though, u
On Wed, May 14, 2014, at 13:27, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On 5/15/14, J.M. Porup wrote:
> > On Wed, May 14, 2014, at 11:53, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> >> Nicolas Vigier:
> >> > It's a little sad that so many people like to use the word "DarkWeb"
> >> > to talk about .onion websites, because it soun
On 5/15/14, J.M. Porup wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014, at 11:53, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
>> Nicolas Vigier:
>> > It's a little sad that so many people like to use the word "DarkWeb"
>> > to talk about .onion websites, because it sounds like something scary
>> > or bad.
>>
>> Agreed. The word "dark
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:00:49PM -0300, J.M. Porup wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014, at 11:53, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> > Nicolas Vigier:
> > > It's a little sad that so many people like to use the word "DarkWeb"
> > > to talk about .onion websites, because it sounds like something scary
> > > or
On 14/05/14 10:19, Mike Cardwell wrote:
> The ideal solution IMO would be a generic web standard which allows us to
> advertise the existence of alternative domains which can be used to reach
> the same content.
For HTML resources, the obvious thing to use would be link
relations[1,2] (using the
Thanks Patrick for the link! I have been needing something like this and
didn't even know it existed. I plan to look into this utility and
respond back with results if anyone is interested.
On 05/14/2014 09:53 AM, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> Nicolas Vigier:
>> On Tue, 13 May 2014, Patrick Schleizer
* on the Wed, May 14, 2014 at 08:08:45AM -0400, Michael Wolf wrote:
>> I would prefer it if the people who run websites with hidden service
>> alternatives would simply check if the client IP is a Tor exit node,
>> and then advertise the availability of the hidden service to such
>> users inside t
On Wed, May 14, 2014, at 11:53, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> Nicolas Vigier:
> > It's a little sad that so many people like to use the word "DarkWeb"
> > to talk about .onion websites, because it sounds like something scary
> > or bad.
>
> Agreed. The word "dark" is already a negatively perceived wo
Nicolas Vigier:
> On Tue, 13 May 2014, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
>> darkweb-everywhere
>>
>> "HTTPS Everywhere rulesets for hidden services and eepsites."
>>
>> https://github.com/chris-barry/darkweb-everywhere
>>
>> Just sharing it, because I thought it's an interesting follow up to
>> our previous
Michael Wolf:
> On 5/14/2014 4:23 AM, Mike Cardwell wrote:
>> * on the Tue, May 13, 2014 at 08:51:28PM -0400, Michael Wolf wrote:
>>> I had an idea recently that might be an improvement (or might not?) on
>>> the darkweb-everywhere concept. What if we introduced an HTTP header
>>> similar to HSTS
Mike Cardwell:
> * on the Tue, May 13, 2014 at 08:51:28PM -0400, Michael Wolf wrote:
>
>>> darkweb-everywhere
>>>
>>> "HTTPS Everywhere rulesets for hidden services and eepsites."
>>>
>>> https://github.com/chris-barry/darkweb-everywhere
>>>
>>
>> I had an idea recently that might be an improvemen
Michael Wolf:
>> And vice versa, should .onion addresses send a HTTP header
>> > `X-Clearnet-Address`?
> I don't see any advantage to doing this.
When the .clearnet domain authenticates/advertises the .onion domain, I
think also the .onion domain should authenticate/advertise the .clearnet
domain.
On 5/14/2014 4:23 AM, Mike Cardwell wrote:
> * on the Tue, May 13, 2014 at 08:51:28PM -0400, Michael Wolf wrote:
>> I had an idea recently that might be an improvement (or might not?) on
>> the darkweb-everywhere concept. What if we introduced an HTTP header
>> similar to HSTS -- `X-Onion-Address`
Tor Weekly News May 14th, 2014
Welcome to the nineteenth issue of Tor Weekly News in 2014, the weekly
newslett
On 5/13/2014 9:32 PM, Mirimir wrote:
> On 05/13/2014 06:51 PM, Michael Wolf wrote:
>> I had an idea recently that might be an improvement (or might not?) on
>> the darkweb-everywhere concept. What if we introduced an HTTP header
>> similar to HSTS -- `X-Onion-Address` perhaps -- which could be sen
On 5/13/2014 9:21 PM, Asa Rossoff wrote:
> On May 14, 2014 00:51 UTC, Michael Wolf wrote:
>> I had an idea recently that might be an improvement (or might not?) on
>> the darkweb-everywhere concept. What if we introduced an HTTP header
>> similar to HSTS -- `X-Onion-Address` perhaps -- which could
On 5/13/2014 9:10 PM, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> Sounds good!
>
> Should some.clearnet.domain/some/thing send
>
> X-Onion-Address: xxx.onion/some/thing
> or
> X-Onion-Address: xxx.onion
> ?
I think the xxx.onion is sufficient. We're simply telling the client
that the site is available at anothe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
What does “Dark Web” mean at all? It is usually defined as “web content
that doesn't get indexed by search engines” but as soon as this
definition is estabilished it gets silently dismissed, and Dark Web is
then used to label .onion servers exclusively
On Tue, 13 May 2014, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> darkweb-everywhere
>
> "HTTPS Everywhere rulesets for hidden services and eepsites."
>
> https://github.com/chris-barry/darkweb-everywhere
>
> Just sharing it, because I thought it's an intere
* on the Tue, May 13, 2014 at 08:51:28PM -0400, Michael Wolf wrote:
>> darkweb-everywhere
>>
>> "HTTPS Everywhere rulesets for hidden services and eepsites."
>>
>> https://github.com/chris-barry/darkweb-everywhere
>>
>
> I had an idea recently that might be an improvement (or might not?) on
>
34 matches
Mail list logo
