Re: [tor-talk] Food for thought

2016-06-16 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 10:05:23PM -, foodforthou...@sigaint.org wrote: > Things are never black and white, there are always two sides of a story > and people are never only good or bad. > > But was it really our first and foremost concern to find out the "truth"? > Is the lesson to be learned

Re: [tor-talk] Bittorrent starting to move entirely within anonymous overlay nets

2016-06-16 Thread grarpamp
On 6/10/16, Mirimir wrote: > But there's still the traffic load. Or maybe, one could consider it as > chaff. Just sort of, though. Right? If that's the old "OMG, too much" argument... load re anon overlay nets may be more like bitcoin's interrelated variables... difficulty, txfees, reward, watts,

Re: [tor-talk] Tor 0.2.8.4-rc is released

2016-06-16 Thread Sarah Alawami
Thanks for this. Hopefully it will make it to homebrew for when I run my update script in a few weeks. Happy Thursday. > On Jun 15, 2016, at 10:00 AM, Nick Mathewson wrote: > > Tor 0.2.8.4-rc is the first release candidate in the Tor 0.2.8 series. > If we find no new bugs or regressions here,

[tor-talk] Food for thought

2016-06-16 Thread foodforthought
Things are never black and white, there are always two sides of a story and people are never only good or bad. But was it really our first and foremost concern to find out the "truth"? Is the lesson to be learned, if you will, about who is to blame? About shaming the victims or shaming the alleged

Re: [tor-talk] Only nine of the 29 Windows VPN clients that I tested didn't leak

2016-06-16 Thread s7r
As far as I was able to find one defense against TCP/IP stack fingerprinting is blocking outgoing ICMP entirely and disabling replying to ICMP requests on the defensive host, but this could be somehow wrong since it's stated that just inspecting the initial TTL and window size fields could be enoug

Re: [tor-talk] Only nine of the 29 Windows VPN clients that I tested didn't leak

2016-06-16 Thread Mirimir
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 06/16/2016 10:28 AM, grarpamp wrote: > On 6/16/16, Mirimir wrote: >> https://vpntesting.info/ >> >> I tested 29 Windows VPN clients for DNS, IPv4 and IPv6 Leaks. > > Nice. > > You might want to include - For clients that may be doing packet > fi

Re: [tor-talk] Only nine of the 29 Windows VPN clients that I tested didn't leak

2016-06-16 Thread Mirimir
On 06/16/2016 10:51 AM, s7r wrote: > Hello grarpamp, mirmir > > Speaking of, there is this website: > http://ipleak.com/ > > If you go to Proxy/VPN in the left menu it will show you some info > related to vpn usage detected. > > In my latest firefox it says: > > First seen2016/06/16 16:47:0

Re: [tor-talk] Only nine of the 29 Windows VPN clients that I tested didn't leak

2016-06-16 Thread s7r
Hello grarpamp, mirmir Speaking of, there is this website: http://ipleak.com/ If you go to Proxy/VPN in the left menu it will show you some info related to vpn usage detected. In my latest firefox it says: First seen 2016/06/16 16:47:04 Last update 2016/06/16 16:47:04 Total flows 1

Re: [tor-talk] Only nine of the 29 Windows VPN clients that I tested didn't leak

2016-06-16 Thread grarpamp
On 6/16/16, Mirimir wrote: > https://vpntesting.info/ > > I tested 29 Windows VPN clients for DNS, IPv4 and IPv6 Leaks. Nice. You might want to include - For clients that may be doing packet filtering instead of just modifying kernel routing tables... test ICMP, generic UDP (non-DNS), TCP, etc.