tordev...@safe-mail.net wrote:
>> The final circuit looks like:
>>
>> Client -> Guard -> Middle -> Middle -> Single Onion
>>
>> The client’s traffic is encrypted through to the single onion server as
>> well.
>
> IMO, the second Middle relay can be considered serving as an exit with
> regards t
Yawning Angel wrote:
> I have two objections to this, one political, one technical:
>
> * (The political objection) While this is "cool" and probably(?)
> "funded", it seems like a poor thing to work on in terms of
> developmental priority when there are other things Hidden Service
> relat
Yawning Angel:
> On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 15:31:15 -0600
> John Brooks wrote:
>
> > > Have you considered all the implications?
> >
> > Maybe we’ve missed some - what implications are you thinking of, that
> > aren’t addressed in the proposal?
>
> I have two objections to this, one political, one tec
Hi Cristobal, just took a peek at Erebus and looks good! There's some
low hanging fruit for improvement (unused functions and such) but
generally looks good.
Cheers! -Damian
==
erebus/server/handlers/log.py
==
On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 15:31:15 -0600
John Brooks wrote:
[snip]
> >
> > Have you considered all the implications?
>
> Maybe we’ve missed some - what implications are you thinking of, that
> aren’t addressed in the proposal?
I have two objections to this, one political, one technical:
* (The poli
Original Message
From: John Brooks
To: tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-dev] Proposal: Single onion services
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 15:31:15 -0600
> tordev...@safe-mail.net wrote:
>
> > Doesn't your proposal imply that you are turning all relays into
> > exit-nodes
