NAT-punching in single-onion services seems to me to be a clear functionality
improvement with an unclear effect on security.
The NAT-punching protocol that we settled on at the dev meeting was:
1. The single-onion service (SOS) maintains a direct connection to an IP.
2. A client does an HSDi
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:12:53PM +0200, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Do you know a use case which needs Single Onion Services and NAT punching?
>
> We’re wondering if there are mobile or desktop applications /
> services that would use a single onion service for the performance
Op 04/10/15 om 06:46 schreef Tim Wilson-Brown - teor:
On 3 Oct 2015, at 13:34, Tom van der Woerdt mailto:i...@tvdw.eu>> wrote:
...
3. Compatibility and security
The implementation of these methods should, ideally, not change
anything in the network, and all control changes are opt-in, so this
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ResearchEthics
>
> Any number of problems and obstacles to legitimate
> research areas exist with this…
I would be interested in any others that you have other than the one you bring
up below.
> "
> It is not acceptable to run an HSDir, harves
