Thanks, Nick!
On 9/13/19 4:24 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 2:05 PM Steve Snyder wrote:
>>
>> Given the multiple compression types supported (none, lzma, zlib, zstd),
>> what is the order of preference for runtime use?
>>
>> Put anothe
Given the multiple compression types supported (none, lzma, zlib, zstd),
what is the order of preference for runtime use?
Put another way, which compression method(s) should be supported to get
optimal runtime performance from a Tor node?
Thanks.
___
to
On 5/4/19 12:26 PM, David Fifield wrote:
> On Sat, May 04, 2019 at 03:27:53PM +, Yawning Angel wrote:
>> On 5/3/19 1:48 PM, Steve Snyder wrote:
>>> FYI, obfs4proxy no longer recognizes address:port in this form:
>>>
>>> ServerTransportListenAddr obfs
FYI, obfs4proxy no longer recognizes address:port in this form:
ServerTransportListenAddr obfs4 [000.000.000.000]:443
Note the square brackets. Tor 0.3.5.8 / 0.4.0.5 still parses this
syntax, and obfs4proxy used to too. As of 0.0.10 it no longer does.
On 4/12/19 1:31 AM, Yawning Angel wrote
Given a contemporary release of Tor with a contemporary version of OpenSSL,
under what circumstances is the intrinsic curve25519_donna() preferred over the
libsodium/NaCl crypto_scalarmult_curve25519(), or vice versa?
Does it come down to 32-bit vs. 64-bit? Or CPU instruction sets detected at
The v0.5 binary is substantially larger than the v0.4 binary (7204KB vs.5408KB,
both built with Go v1.4.2).
Is this expected behavior with the newer version of obfs4proxy?
On Wednesday, April 15, 2015 5:19pm, "Yawning Angel"
said:
> ___
> tor-dev
Over 3 days I've gotten 9 instances of the sequence shown below.
This on Tor v0.2.5.8-rc / x86_64. I am at 80% CPU utilization with
BandwidthRate set to 90Mbps on this 100Mbps interface.
Should I be concerned about this log output, or is it just verbose
because v0.2.5.x is still in development?
What are the recommended build options for OpenSSL 1.0.1x when building it for
use with Tor v0.2.5.x?
Put another way, what default OpenSSL features (ciphers, etc.) should be
disabled and what optional features should be enabled?
My goal here is to build a Tor-oriented OpenSSL, one that dispens
Attempting to build tbb-3.5.1-build1, and failing. See below for failure.
I am building on a fully-updated Ubuntu v12.04LTS/x86_64 system. I am using
the USE_LXC method because KVM won't work in this VMware VM.
On my first attempt I did a "make all". That didn't work, so I tried
"./mkbundle-li
FYI, OpenSSL v1.0.1-beta1 seems to work fine when building and running Tor
v0.2.2.35 (Linux/i686).
Too early to say anything about performance (critical as the crypto is the
performance bottleneck in Tor) but it definitely works as a drop-in replacement
for OpenSSL v1.0.0e.
http://marc.info/?l
On 10/03/2011 11:32 AM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
Hi, all! This is a reminder about the planned schedule for 0.2.3.x.
A related question: is there a document somewhere that lists the changes
(new features, changed behavior, etc.) in 0.2.3.x relative to 0.2.2.x?
Thanks.
__
Is there documentation anywhere on how to build the Vidalia-bundle for Windows?
If so, where can I find it?
Thanks.
___
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
When configured using the --enable-openbsd-malloc option Tor v0.2.1.30 will
build without error on RHEL5, but then won't run. The cause of the runtime
problem is that the symbol __libc_enable_secure is defined in
OpenBSD_malloc_Linux.c but not actually built into the GLibC used in RHEL5.
Can I
13 matches
Mail list logo
