On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 02:45:34 -0500
grarpamp wrote:
> > Of course, until you factor in the information we received later which
> > is that a researcher has apparently been using a technique to discover
> > "passively" eavesdropping nodes, and the node in question here came
> > up. Sort of mooting
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 11:07:49 -0400
Paul Syverson wrote:
> universities are in on it, and the supposedly independent researchers
> who found code flaws were also in on it (or sock puppets created by
> Roger to create credibility). But at some point you have to look at
> the size, diversity, and en
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 05:13:39 -0500 (CDT)
Scott Bennett wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 10:17:30 -0800 Robert Ransom
> wrote:
> >On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 13:21:22 +0100
> >anonym wrote:
> >
> >> While I've been developing the LiveCDs Incognito and Tails I've got my
> >> fair share of feature request
On Sat, 2 Apr 2011 13:49:15 -0400
Kragen Javier Sitaker wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 09:35:00AM -0600, Pablo Velo de Swaan wrote:
> > oigan tengo entendido que la última version del tor button es la
> > 1.2.5. pero no es compatible con mozila firefox 4. Bueno, esperemos 1
> > añito a que esto
On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 14:17:48 -0500
Joe Btfsplk wrote:
>
>
> On 4/2/2011 12:16 PM, Matthew wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>
> >> This problem has been discussed before, but I don't know the real
> >> solution, if there is one. Because the Tor exit node (in my case)
> >> appears to be in a diff country th
On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 02:39 -0600, Jim wrote:
> kuhkatz wrote:
> > you could just put the survey on a .onion-site to ensure only tor-users
> > can vote.
> > maybe you would still consider blocking the tor2web-proxies.
>
> In terms of of the Tor network, aren't tor2web proxies simply ordinary
> c
On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 22:31 +0200, Moritz Bartl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 04.05.2011 22:11, Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) wrote:
> > It would be possible to remove X-Forwarded-For from tor2web proxy:
> > * At apache mod_proxy_http level with a code patch:
> > http://blog.basteagow.com/2011/04/02/mod_proxy_ht
On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 21:42 -0400, Lu Yu wrote:
> I know how these weights (Wgg, Wgm .) are calculated. But then what?
>
> How to choose the path using the weights? My understanding is to
> calculate the weighted sum of the bandwidth of each possible circuits
> (Isn't the computation too muc
On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 16:39 +0100, t...@lists.grepular.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't know if this is something we should be concerned about, but I
> thought I'd bring it to your attention anyway.
>
> Firefox 4 implements Content-Security-Policy:
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/CSP/Specificatio
On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 11:33 -0500, David Carlson wrote:
> On 6/9/2011 10:11 AM, Jon wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 9:41 AM, David Carlson
> > wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I just tried to access a few IRC channels on a couple of different IRC
> >> servers (gnone.org, gimp.org, and their associates
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 17:05 +0200, Andreas Bader wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 13.10.2011 14:02, Karsten N. wrote:
> > Am 13.10.2011 08:39, schrieb William Wrightman:
> >> Is moving to Linux one solution?
> >
> > I agree with Adrew, there is no 100% solution.
> >
On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 13:37 -0700, Mike Perry wrote:
> Thus spake Moritz Bartl (mor...@torservers.net):
>
> > On 11.10.2011 04:07, Mike Perry wrote:
> > >> At the moment, I cannot think of any attack vectors once you combine it
> > >> with enabled Torbutton (or a stripped down Tor Browser) where a
On 11/06/2011 03:05 PM, Julian Yon wrote:
> Personally I use DDG, partly because of privacy concerns and partly
> because I don't like the new-look Google. You can always do a Google
> search through DDG or Scroogle if you're feeling paranoid.
DuckDuckGo's !bang queries are just redirects. You'll b
13 matches
Mail list logo
