On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 5:21 AM Michael Rogers <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/09/2024 14:12, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> > ## An answer you probably can't use: embedding Arti > > > > Right now, you can embed Arti in any Rust app. Some folks have > > already started to write wrappers for Java and other languages. With > > our RPC protocol, we intend to support embedding Arti in any > > application written in any language that can call C and link a > > library. > > > > So with this solution, there is no SOCKS port at all, and nobody can > > use your Tor client but you. > > I think we'll want to move to embedding Arti via Java bindings in > future, but we may still want to expose a SOCKS port so that we can use > HTTP libraries that expect to talk to a SOCKS port. > > Is that expected to be a supported way of using Arti? For example, if > we're talking to Arti via bindings rather than RPC on the control port, > will it still be possible to open a SOCKS port and will we still have a > session ID that we can use as a capability on the SOCKS port? I do think this is something that we want to support, but I don't know if we'll get it built in the earliest versions of our FFI embedding logic. There is a _lot_ of code to write, and a _lot_ of functionality to support -- so please poke us again (maybe on the bugtracker?) if this isn't easily do-able in the first supported FFI embedding scheme we make. _______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
