[tor-dev] [measurement team] analytics server proposal

analytics server proposal = tl;dr - measurement team is setting up a server for you to play with raw metrics data. please check below if it meets your requirements and if you have any suggestions for the setup. Motivation + Setup -- An idea came up d

Re: [tor-dev] Concerns regarding a multilingual version of TBB,

> On 9 Oct 2015, at 06:42, Yet Another Tor User > wrote: > > I saw an email on the Wiki mailing list concerning a multilingual version of > Tor. If that was made possible your language tag be used to track you. This > could break your anonymity. Your thoughts? Tor is currently available in m

[tor-dev] Concerns regarding a multilingual version of TBB,

I saw an email on the Wiki mailing list concerning a multilingual version of Tor. If that was made possible your language tag be used to track you. This could break your anonymity. Your thoughts? ___ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@lists.torproject.org ht

Re: [tor-dev] UniformDH question

On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 05:04:14PM +0200, Jeff Burdges wrote: > > What is the advantage of using X or p-X in UniformDH in obfsproxy? > > https://gitweb.torproject.org/pluggable-transports/obfsproxy.git/tree/d > oc/obfs3/obfs3-protocol-spec.txt#n65 > > Isn't just X itself dense pretty quickly any

[tor-dev] UniformDH question

What is the advantage of using X or p-X in UniformDH in obfsproxy? https://gitweb.torproject.org/pluggable-transports/obfsproxy.git/tree/d oc/obfs3/obfs3-protocol-spec.txt#n65 Isn't just X itself dense pretty quickly anyways? Jeff signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed messag

Re: [tor-dev] ResearchEthics

> The idea of that list is to provide specific activities for which the costs > are judged not to outweigh the benefits. Sorry, that should have been "for which the costs are judged *to* outweigh the benefits”. Also, I should have mentioned that even being on that list wouldn't necessarily be

Re: [tor-dev] ResearchEthics

> On 9 Oct 2015, at 01:21, Aaron Johnson wrote: > > Hello Rishab, > >> I've been meaning to respond to this for a while. > > Thanks for your thoughts. > >> For what it's worth, I completely disagree that outright "banning" of >> certain data collection is the right answer here. There should

Re: [tor-dev] ResearchEthics

Hello Rishab, > I've been meaning to respond to this for a while. Thanks for your thoughts. > For what it's worth, I completely disagree that outright "banning" of certain > data collection is the right answer here. There should be a standard "let's > weigh the risks vs. the benefits and make

Re: [tor-dev] Trac priorities and severities

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 4:37 AM, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote: > > On 8 Oct 2015, at 05:01, Nick Mathewson wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 11:56 AM, David Goulet wrote: > > Hello tor-dev! > > While 028 bug triaging, we realized that we *really* need priorities to > not be a banana field depriv

Re: [tor-dev] ResearchEthics

Forgive the lack of inlining. I've been meaning to respond to this for a while. For what it's worth, I completely disagree that outright "banning" of certain data collection is the right answer here. There should be a standard "let's weigh the risks vs. the benefits and make a decision" for any/al

Re: [tor-dev] Trac priorities and severities

Hi, Yes, renaming to a more meaningful thing is great. Also, if only some group can grade entries, then it is wise to have an 'uncategorised' category which appears in a grading list towards, but not at the bottom. Field experience in these systems tells me that people get annoyed at being auto

Re: [tor-dev] Trac priorities and severities

> On 8 Oct 2015, at 05:01, Nick Mathewson wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 11:56 AM, David Goulet > wrote: >> Hello tor-dev! >> >> While 028 bug triaging, we realized that we *really* need priorities to >> not be a banana field deprive of useful meaning. If you are u