I changed the firewall rules.
/etc/firewall.user
This file is interpreted as shell script.
# Put your custom iptables rules here, they will
# be executed with each firewall (re-)start.
# Internal uci firewall chains are flushed and recreated on reload, so
# put custom rules into the root chains
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/02/2015 10:35 PM, krishna e bera wrote:
> The new copyright law in Canada would seem to require anyone
> claiming ISP safe harbour protection to log data of users for 6
> months and to forward alleged copyright violation notices to them.
>
> h
The new copyright law in Canada would seem to require anyone claiming
ISP safe harbour protection to log data of users for 6 months and to
forward alleged copyright violation notices to them.
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2014/12/notice-difference-new-canadian-internet-copyright-rules-isps-set-launch
you said you uses Host-Only adapter in your VM, so you need set the proxy
as YOUR_HOST_IP:9050 not 127.0.0.1:9050
2015-01-03 11:40 GMT+08:00 盼盼李 :
> I set the socks5 proxy in QQ as 127.0.0.1 9150 ,it did not work
> another question:The netstat shows below,so if tor listening on port 9150
> and 91
I set the socks5 proxy in QQ as 127.0.0.1 9150 ,it did not work
another question:The netstat shows below,so if tor listening on port 9150
and 9151,why tor also listening on port 1349?Thanks for the answer
TCP127.0.0.1:9150 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING 2944
TCP127.0.0.
Quoting Christopher Yeager (2015-01-02 19:31:05)
> Hi tor users, my coworkers and I are considering getting together to
> run a gigabit exit relay and are curious if you all have advice as to
> the best place to go shopping for a server with 1gbps dedicated
> bandwidth in a location that is helpful
try to use Proxifier, QQ sometimes bypasses your proxy setting
2015-01-03 11:09 GMT+08:00 盼盼李 :
> Thanks.virtualbox xp system is host-only,I can use chrome and tor browser
> to surf internet,I see the proxy is 127.0.0.1 9150,so I write this into
> QQ's proxy settings,but the QQ can not log in
Thanks.virtualbox xp system is host-only,I can use chrome and tor browser
to surf internet,I see the proxy is 127.0.0.1 9150,so I write this into
QQ's proxy settings,but the QQ can not log in,I did not know why,the
virtualbox xp system's firewall is off.
This is the phenomenon,help me,thank you.
O
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Very similar to the setup I have in terms of using one virtual machine
as a Tor gateway for others to connect to via an internal network. My
concern is how well the model will scale and whether it can hold
multiple high traffic hidden services. I am
New paper "Systemization of Pluggable Transports for Censorship
Resistance" from Ross Anderson's research group at Cambridge:
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/1412.7448 [0]
Related blog entry:
https://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2015/01/02/systemization-of-pluggable-transports-for-censorship-resistance/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2015-01-02 15:55, s7r wrote:
>
> .onion Tor Hidden Services _already provide end to end encryption
> and authentication_ when used with the default http. They are not
> vulnerable to man in the middle attacks or hijacks. On top of this
> primary
check host-os' port or firewall
===
检查下主机的端口开没开 是不是防火墙阻止了
2015-01-03 9:49 GMT+08:00 盼盼李 :
> i start tor on a virtualbox xp system,host-only mode,i start tor
> successfuly,but I have problem when I want to start QQ,anyone can help? 3x!
> --
> tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists
On 1/2/2015 20:49, 盼盼李 wrote:
> i start tor on a virtualbox xp system,host-only mode,i start tor
> successfuly,but I have problem when I want to start QQ,anyone can help? 3x!
>
Hi,
Can you be more explicit please? Are you seeing any error messages, if
so what are them?
--
Sadiq Saif
https://st
i start tor on a virtualbox xp system,host-only mode,i start tor
successfuly,but I have problem when I want to start QQ,anyone can help? 3x!
--
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
I am using another way to solve IP leaks problem.
my host-os is CentOS and only installed VirtualBox
I have 2 virtual machines running on the host-os
the first one is a CentOS with 2 network adapter, one is NAT , another is
Internal(ip: 192.168.222.1).
it running Tor and ShadowSocks(bypass GFW) , T
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi Larry,
No problem, best to email me privately (please use another title,
anything with [tor-talk] in the title is put into my mailing list
folder which gets hundreds of messages so I might not see it otherwise.
So far there has been a pretty dec
Hi tor users, my coworkers and I are considering getting together to
run a gigabit exit relay and are curious if you all have advice as to
the best place to go shopping for a server with 1gbps dedicated
bandwidth in a location that is helpful to the network. Someone on irc
pointed me to this list,
On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 06:26:34 +
Thomas White wrote:
> The whole CA system is a broken model in many ways yes, but that
> doesn't mean we should totally disregard it. We can work with the CA's
> to build up a standing as long as we don't forget that CA's are no
> requirement to legitimacy. If a
+1
Am 03.01.2015 01:05 schrieb Morten Linderud :
>
> In all honesty. Can we please just forget about Lizard Squad and NOT give
> them the attention they so badly want?
>
> ~
> Morten Linderud
>
> On 01/03/2015 01:03 AM, hellekin wrote:
> > On 01/02/2015 08:26 PM, liza...@riseup.net wrote:
>
In all honesty. Can we please just forget about Lizard Squad and NOT give
them the attention they so badly want?
~
Morten Linderud
On 01/03/2015 01:03 AM, hellekin wrote:
> On 01/02/2015 08:26 PM, liza...@riseup.net wrote:
>> ok
>
> *** It's interesting to see how much you care about your own, a
I totally agree with you.
While the Tor network already provides crypto, an on-top encryption wouldn't be
bad.
If one security layer has holes there would be an additional layer/fallback.
Am 03.01.2015 00:55 schrieb s7r :
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Now why would w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 01/02/2015 08:26 PM, liza...@riseup.net wrote:
> ok
>
*** It's interesting to see how much you care about your own, and how
much you care about responding to conversation. You seem to show the
same care, or lack thereof about choosing your target
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Now why would we use https on top of a Tor Hidden Service?
http://foo.onion is not the same as http://foo.com
The regular internet (clearnet) domains, when used with http, do not
provide any kind of encryption or authentication and are vulnerable to
ok
> The Lizards seem to have been quiet recently...
>
> thehackernews.com/2015/01/two-lizard-squad-hackers-arrested-after.html
>
> Robert
>
>
> --
> tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
> To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/
The Lizards seem to have been quiet recently...
thehackernews.com/2015/01/two-lizard-squad-hackers-arrested-after.html
Robert
--
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Why does Tor have to setup an official CA and passing some audits? Are
they even public?
And why should Tor even rely on that broken CA system? In my opinion a
self signed certificate is the best way at the moment to ship.
The tor developers should invest some time in the CA topic after Tor
become
On 01/02/2015 06:03 AM, Virgil Griffith wrote:
> Being a CA for .onion seems a reasonable thing to be. Should someone
> already part of the Tor community like torservers.net become that CA?
I don't think becoming an official CA (ie. passing the audits required
for inclusion in major browsers) is
I'm interested but a slow mover. Work sometimes gets in my way. I am putting
together pages for a hidden site but I don't think I can be ready to put it on
line til month's end. It will be a legal site everywhere. This is a wonderful
offer Thomas. Hope someone takes you up on it.
Larry Bra
Sebastian, I like your manual method! I was not aware that Windows had a
feature to create shortcuts from the desktop. I'll do that for the time being,
unless someone else has an idea about why the Tor Button is blocking my ability
to make shortcuts. Thanks!
~Michael
> Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2015
02.01.2015, 22:23 Michael Fitzpatrick:
> Sebastian, thanks for the great feedback! I'd love to just create
> shortcuts manually, but I'm not sure how to do even that much in the
> Tor Browser. For example, if I right click on a page, there is no
> option to save a shortcut to the desktop. And while
Sebastian, thanks for the great feedback! I'd love to just create shortcuts
manually, but I'm not sure how to do even that much in the Tor Browser. For
example, if I right click on a page, there is no option to save a shortcut to
the desktop. And while I can create bookmarks, I cannot shortcut b
Cyrus wrote:
> My server is behind a Tor transparent proxy on a separate machine.
> Customers have just started reporting getting email from their sites,
> and the headers show this to be coming from exit nodes. I can't see any
> update news that the policy on SMTP has changed.
>
> It might just b
02.01.2015, 20:29 Michael Fitzpatrick:
> Greetings Tor Talk,
>
> I am a tor user with a question. I was encouraged by the Tor Project support
> team to send my question out to you all.
That is strange. I was under the impression they would know.
Mostly because they are multiple individuals wit
Michael,
Though I just see a padlock icon to the left of the URL, I can drag a
shortcut to my desktop.
[Tor Browser 4.0.2 Mac] Same with bookmarked sites.
Awesome,
SpencerOne
Greetings Tor Talk,
I am a tor user with a question. I was encouraged by the Tor Project
support team to send
Greetings Tor Talk,
I am a tor user with a question. I was encouraged by the Tor Project support
team to send my question out to you all.
> >
> > I've come across a strange issue that the Firefox team has been unable
> >to solve thus far. I've already checked your FAQ and I didn't see
>
My server is behind a Tor transparent proxy on a separate machine.
Customers have just started reporting getting email from their sites,
and the headers show this to be coming from exit nodes. I can't see any
update news that the policy on SMTP has changed.
It might just be bad exit nodes, but acc
If I'm not mistaken, DuckDuckGo used to run an exit enclave but ended up moving
over to a hidden service. Not sure if their reasons for moving over to a HS
were documented in the same way as their exit enclave blog.
Colin
On January 2, 2015 3:25:32 AM EST, Katya Titov wrote:
>Virgil Griffith:
01.01.2015, 21:56 Nick Mathewson:
> On Dec 31, 2014 3:03 PM, "Sebastian G. " <
> bastik@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 31.12.2014, 19:27 Nick Mathewson:
>>
>> Happy New Year to everyone.
>>
>> Some stuff could have been called "Minor changes" to silence people that
>> grep for "bugfix
Jonathan,
Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions! In a broader sense,
it appears as if I do understand the concept of Tor Hidden Services, an
anonymity overlay of the Internet Protocol. I referred to a security
blanket since I thought we were securing our anonymity using Tor, but
http://selke.de/data/uploads/countries-2014.pdf
http://selke.de/data/uploads/monthly-2014.pdf
regards Olaf
--
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Arxaios,
Thanks for the passionate response, but it seems like you are
reconfirming the need for TorPhone. It seems that only by choice this
"rule" is followed. Unless it is the nature of an open programming
language to write what you want, malicious or not, which I think it is,
I certainly
Thomas White:
> The whole CA system is a broken model in many ways yes, but that
> doesn't mean we should totally disregard it. We can work with the CA's
> to build up a standing as long as we don't forget that CA's are no
> requirement to legitimacy. If a standard is set by the CA community
> this
Virgil Griffith:
> If an existing website simply wants to improve performance for Tor
> users, my understanding is that it's more efficient simply to run an
> Exit Enclave instead of a hidden service. Is that true?
>
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ExitEnclave
I have no direc
Just wanted to point out that I think it's awesome Thomas is doing this!
Buy him a beer if you see him.
Tom
Thomas White schreef op 02/01/15 om 09:42:
Hey all,
So following my other mail, I just want to offer people on this
mailing list a chance to test something out before I go into the wi
I'd be interested :)
sc...@arciszewski.me my PGP key is on https://scott.arciszewski.me/contact
(airgapped of course)
On Jan 2, 2015 3:43 AM, "Thomas White" wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Hey all,
>
> So following my other mail, I just want to offer people on this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hey all,
So following my other mail, I just want to offer people on this
mailing list a chance to test something out before I go into the wider
public with it.
I have been reviewing some ways in which to offer "hosting" solutions
for hidden service
46 matches
Mail list logo
