It would be cool to build the browser with
https://github.com/google/sanitizers this way you could get bug reports for
bugs that don't panic the browser
Il lun 3 apr 2017, 07:10 Tom Ritter ha scritto:
> On 1 April 2017 at 09:22, Nur-Magomed wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> > I've updated Proposal[1] accord
On 1 April 2017 at 09:22, Nur-Magomed wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> I've updated Proposal[1] according to your recommendations.
>
> 1) https://storm.torproject.org/grain/ECCJ3Taeq93qCvPJoWJkkY/
Looks good to me!
> 2017-03-31 19:46 GMT+03:00 Tom Ritter :
>>
>> On 31 March 2017 at 10:27, Nur-Magomed wrote:
On 2017-04-02 05:22, Jeremy Rand wrote:
> (Thinking out loud.) It would be interesting to have some kind of
> algorithm agility here. For example, a Tor client could send a
> request for a Namecoin domain name, and the exit relay would return a
> Namecoin merkle proof in the same way that it woul
New members are very welcome and valued whether
through gradual accretion or project influx such as GSOC's.
In order to ensure messaging efficiency and clarity...
- Reply *below* what others have written. Do not "top post".
- Trim out and *delete* irrelavant portions of what others
have written, s
On Sun, Apr 02, 2017 at 04:51:40PM +, dawuud wrote:
>
> Hi. I registered with Google to be a GSoC mentor for Tor Project.
> Hopefully Meejah will agree to be the backup mentor for this
> and register today or tomorrow before the deadline on Monday.
>
> Let me know if there's anything else tim
Hi. I registered with Google to be a GSoC mentor for Tor Project.
Hopefully Meejah will agree to be the backup mentor for this
and register today or tomorrow before the deadline on Monday.
Let me know if there's anything else timely that I must do for this.
Cheers,
David
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017
Howdy,
Thanks for making these points. They made me realize that this initiative:
http://bootstrappable.org/
Might not be on folks' radars.
It was an outcome of the last Reproducible Builds Summit in December [1].
It just does a good job of articulating problems and proposed some
possible coll
Oops, clicked the SEND button accidentally.
Sorry! You can ignore it.
> Ah! That reminds me that OP(of this thread) should also aim to fix #8786
> along with that could enable such a counting technique for Pluggable
> transports.
>
> Now coming to the main point,
>
>> In addition, each user doe
On 02.04.17 15:22, Aaron Johnson wrote:
> Also, I think that counting users by IP is still a fine way to do it (absent
> the privacy issue that PCSA tries to address). I was just stating that my
> understanding based on talking to the Tor Metrics people is that the plan is
> to handle the privac
Dear Mentor,
Please find my draft application here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AItxT3k-K1tSHa0OJDl3AC4BL_xYoCUWv6IHDnb4if8/edit?usp=sharing.
I have also uploaded it through the GSoC 2017 Official Website.
Thank you for your time and effort,
Sincerely,
Jayati Dev
__
Plz send the link of your draft Jayanti so I can submit my draft by
reviving your format..
Best,
Veer
On 02-Apr-2017 8:02 PM, "Jayati Dev" wrote:
> Dear Mentors,
>
>
> I am a final year student in Electronics and Communication Engineering,
> and I wanted to work on the 'Feedback Extension for T
Dear Mentors,
I am a final year student in Electronics and Communication Engineering, and I
wanted to work on the 'Feedback Extension for Tor Browser' project as a part of
GSoC 2017. I have been working on the design and implementation of the
extension here https://github.com/devjayati/TestExt
Hello,
I was interested in the project for allowing any kind of DNS support in Tor
for GSoC, or, since it is late for that deadline, then also otherwise.
After reading proposal 219, I have some questions.
1. A comment by NM suggests that we should specify exact behavior when
generating DNS packet
> We should also consider how this proposal would interact with other
> proposed secure aggregation solutions, like Privcount [1] and/or some
> other kind of PrivEx [2]. I'd like to hear what the designers of
> those ideas think of this one.
As you know, PrivCount is a secure aggregation system.
Also, I think that counting users by IP is still a fine way to do it (absent
the privacy issue that PCSA tries to address). I was just stating that my
understanding based on talking to the Tor Metrics people is that the plan is to
handle the privacy issue by moving to per-connection country stat
Sorry, I should have been more clear there. Tor Metrics estimates the total
number of users by counting the number of directory downloads and dividing by
an estimated expected number of directory downloads per user per day (10, I
believe). This statistic is in the graph under the “Relay Users” t
about which stats are you talking Aaron?
On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Aaron Johnson
wrote:
> > These statistics not just tell about the user's country but also keep a
> > track of unique IP addresses connecting from each country. This is
> > needed so as to present more realistic stats. If w
> These statistics not just tell about the user's country but also keep a
> track of unique IP addresses connecting from each country. This is
> needed so as to present more realistic stats. If we increment counter on
> any IP address instead of unique IP address then the statistics would
> also re
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Donncha O'Cearbhaill
wrote:
> The Tor bad-relay team regularly detects malicious exit relays which are
> actively manipulating Tor traffic. These attackers appear financial
> motivated and have primarily been observed modifying Bitcoin and onion
> address which ar
19 matches
Mail list logo
