Hi Nick,
> On 21 Mar 2020, at 05:38, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>
> Walking Onions: week 3 update
>
> As you might recall, the SNIPs need to be nice and small, but they
> need to be completely self-contained. The ENDIVE, on the other
> hand, needs to be diff-friendly, and compressible. Relays nee
Walking Onions: week 3 update
On our current grant from the zcash foundation, I'm working on a
full specification for the Walking Onions design. I'm going to try to
send out these updates once a week.
My previous updates are linked below:
Week 1:
formats, preliminaries, git repositories, b
Hi Nick,
> On 20 Mar 2020, at 23:01, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 11:21 AM teor wrote:
>>
>>> On 14 Mar 2020, at 14:44, teor wrote:
>>>
* As I work, I'm identifying other issues in tor that stand in
the way of a good efficient walking onion implementation tha
anonym:
> In Tails' threat model it is assumed that adversaries monitor the default
> bridges provided by the Tor Browser, and that our users want to avoid
> detection of that, so we are not interested in adding the default bridges to
> Tails
We're not offering the default bridges in Tails also
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 11:21 AM teor wrote:
>
> Hi Nick,
>
> > On 14 Mar 2020, at 14:44, teor wrote:
> >
> >> * As I work, I'm identifying other issues in tor that stand in
> >>the way of a good efficient walking onion implementation that
> >>will require other follow-up work. This wee
On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 12:44 AM teor wrote:
>
> Hi Nick,
>
> I'm interested in following along with Walking Onions, but I might
> drop out when the relay IPv6 work gets busy.
>
> I'm not sure how you'd like feedback, so I'm going to try to put it
> in emails, or in pull requests.
>
> (I made one
Hi,
tl;dr: if Tails makes it too easy to use Meek bridges, could it overload the
current set of Meek bridges?
First some background: during startup Tails can be told to start Tor Launcher
so users can e.g. configure any bridges they want. So far we have not provided
any pre-configured bridges,
