Hey Ximin,
I don't think it's been discussed in-depth before (at least not
on-list), but I've thought a fair bit about it. While it's an
interesting idea, I don't think that the risks for deploying it far
outweigh any minor reward that could come of it. This idea has come up
several times
Team -
Today's meeting of the Otter Buoyant project needs to be postponed until
next Tuesday, 1/7. My laptop is having problems and I will be offline
this afternoon to repair it. (hopefully)
See you all on IRC next Tuesday 1/7 - 3:30 pm (EST) - IRC #tor-dev.
Happy New Years!
Kelley
--
*Ke
On 31/12/13 12:35, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> On 2013-12-31 12:07, Ximin Luo wrote:
>> Hey all,
>>
>> Flashproxy[1] helps to bypass entry-node blocks. But we could apply
>> the general idea to exit-nodes as well - have the exit-node connect
>> to the destination via an ephemeral proxy.
>
> If an exit
On 2013-12-31 12:07, Ximin Luo wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Flashproxy[1] helps to bypass entry-node blocks. But we could apply
> the general idea to exit-nodes as well - have the exit-node connect
> to the destination via an ephemeral proxy.
If an exit node is blocked towards a certain site, that exit
Hey all,
Flashproxy[1] helps to bypass entry-node blocks. But we could apply the general
idea to exit-nodes as well - have the exit-node connect to the destination via
an ephemeral proxy. The actual technology probably needs to be different since
we can't assume the destination has a flashproxy
