Roger Dingledine:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 06:52:51AM +, Mike Perry wrote:
> > 3.1. Eliminate path restrictions entirely
> >
> I'm increasingly a fan of this option, the more I read these threads.
>
> Let's examine the two attacker assumptions behind two of the attacks
> we're worried about.
> Good question!
>
> While I didn't necessarily work on sbws while at my place of work, I
> couldn't rationalize that it is unrelated to my day job. Thus I need to
> get permission from my employer in order to release sbws.
>
> I've already submitted that paperwork and expect to get it back in abou
On 4/13/18 12:26, Damian Johnson wrote:
>> https://github.com/pastly/simple-bw-scanner/blob/master/docs/source/specification.rst
>> (ask Pastly for access)
>
> Hi Matt, why is this repo read restricted? I was idly curious to see
> the code of sbws and was surprised it's effectively closed source.
> https://github.com/pastly/simple-bw-scanner/blob/master/docs/source/specification.rst
> (ask Pastly for access)
Hi Matt, why is this repo read restricted? I was idly curious to see
the code of sbws and was surprised it's effectively closed source.
___
Thanks Tom!
There's a few more things that I think we need to figure out before we
take you up on this offer.
I'll keep you in mind though, because I think having sbws and torflow
running side by side is something that should happen very soon.
Stay tuned! And thanks for your help obtaining torfl
