On 2/16/15 11:45 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> In some unique situations you may not even be
> able to spawn/access the control port. So ability
> compiling in HS keys etc would be useful there.
>
> There may already be some tickets for these things.
That's that Windows PE files does with "PE Resources" t
On 2/16/15 11:22 PM, meejah wrote:
>
> I guess to put another way: I can't see a use-case to keep the hidden-
> service around if the application that added it went away.
+1 from globaleaks perspective
-naif
___
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torpr
In situations where it is inconvenient / impossible to
manage / rely a bunch of library files, dropping a static
compiled tor in place is handy. Similarly, it should be possible
to completely configure and run tor in that one static
binary and in ram... no other files at all (torrc, geoip, .tor
sta
>From my perspective, the entire point of this feature is to allow
applications to use "the system Tor" (or, at least "some already-running
tor") to put their hidden services on.
(Or, looking at it another way, if you don't want to share a tor
instance with other applications, you can do that eas
> As an app developer this strikes me as the right approach. But having
> said that, I wouldn't actually need this feature because Briar already
> uses __OwningControllerProcess to shut down Tor if the control
> connection is closed. I imagine the same would apply to any app that
> manages its own
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 19:35:58 +
Michael Rogers wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> (CCing the hidden-services list.)
(Wonder if my reply will bounce.)
> On 16/02/15 16:11, Leif Ryge wrote:
> >> If someone has a suggestion for an alternative interface that
> >> can
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
(CCing the hidden-services list.)
On 16/02/15 16:11, Leif Ryge wrote:
>> If someone has a suggestion for an alternative interface that
>> can handle applications crashing (possibly before they persist
>> the list of HSes they need to clean up), appl
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 16:11:55 +
Leif Ryge wrote:
[snippity]
> However, it seems like in the case of applications which are not
> HS-specific this will necessitate keeping another process running
> just to keep the HS alive. I'd rather see two modes: one as you
> describe, and another in which t
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 03:47:07PM +, Yawning Angel wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 10:17:51 -0500
> David Goulet wrote:
> [snip]
> > A hidden service is created using the key and list of
> > port/targets, that will persist till configuration reload or the
> > termination of the tor process.
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 10:17:51 -0500
David Goulet wrote:
[snip]
> A hidden service is created using the key and list of
> port/targets, that will persist till configuration reload or the
> termination of the tor process.
>
> Now, an HS bound to a control connection might be a good idea, I'm n
On 14 Feb (00:45:24), Yawning Angel wrote:
Hey Yawning, great stuff btw! I have a questions below regarding
meejah's comment and
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/6411#comment:32
"Ephemeral hidden services are tied to the control port connection that
created them. This means, that w
Hi,
> Yes, I'm also wondering whether the anonymity of low-latency Tor would
> increase if we plugged a high-latency network into it, and also the
> opposite. I'm curious on whether one network will act as cover traffic
> for the other, and what kind of adversaries that would fool.
>
> On this to
12 matches
Mail list logo
