On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 3:51 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> Freenet has talk on their lists of adding 100 new onioncat nodes
> to tor and i2p as linked to in this thread...
>
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-June/011108.html
More folks blogging related to the above...
http://mh7mkfve
Many wrote, in subthread started by dawuud 5 days ago:
> talk: internet of things, security / exploit / nsa, crypto via tor,
> everything over tor, exits
This subthread does not concern the subject made for curating /
supporting / tracking / developing "Onioncat and Prop224" [1].
Please a) end it,
Op 05-10-16 om 19:36 schreef Evan d'Entremont:
to be more clear, those devices can currently be surveilled passively.
If they were encrypted they couldn't be.
ic, valid point. I was thinking more of the recent rise in exploited IoT
devices[1] and the sad state of IoT security in general.
[1]
to be more clear, those devices can currently be surveilled passively. If
they were encrypted they couldn't be.
On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 2:31 PM Evan d'Entremont
wrote:
> > Changing the subject a bit, isn't The Internet of Things
> going to lead to a situation where there are even more NSA, GCHQ,
> Changing the subject a bit, isn't The Internet of Things
going to lead to a situation where there are even more NSA, GCHQ, BND
remotely controlled computers with microphones and other sensors all around
us
They didn't say anything about exploits.
I just have several gateways on my desk and none
Op 04-10-16 om 16:59 schreef Tim Kuijsten:
Op 03-10-16 om 19:43 schreef Evan d'Entremont:
Not if IoT dev's start encrypting things.
How would encryption help against exploited IoT devices?
sorry, i meant to ask how would encryption help against *exploiting* IoT
devices.
___
Op 03-10-16 om 19:43 schreef Evan d'Entremont:
Not if IoT dev's start encrypting things.
How would encryption help against exploited IoT devices?
___
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listin
>
> Changing the subject a bit, isn't The Internet of Things
> going to lead to a situation where there are even more NSA, GCHQ, BND
> remotely controlled computers with microphones and other sensors all
> around us
>
Not if IoT dev's start encrypting things.
On a side note, hidden services are a
Greetings, again.
No it's not good enough if TCP is being layered on top of TCP.
Otherwise... then yes it should be good enough. I've previously
used it with mosh which uses UDP.
Changing the subject a bit, isn't The Internet of Things
going to lead to a situation where there are even more NSA
Allow me to second that - for some applications (Internet of Things being
the one I'm working on), the volume of data exchanged is very small, so
there isn't much chance for packets to be lost or retransmitted. OnionCat +
Tor simplify development immensely by giving each node a fixed IPv6
address,
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:30 AM, dawuud wrote:
> Are you aware of Tahoe-LAFS?
Don't know if they are, or if they are here, all we have is their short post.
If they just need an insert and retrieve filestore for small user
bases, there are lots of choices. If they need the more global
and random
OK I'm replying inline;
> https://www.reddit.com/r/TOR/comments/54rpil/dht_syncthing_bitsync_over_tor/
>
> Hi we would like to integrate DHT Bittorrent Syncing over Tor for our
> open source encrypted obfuscated media rich notepad app.
Why Bittorrent?
It's fun to think about using various comp
https://www.reddit.com/r/TOR/comments/54rpil/dht_syncthing_bitsync_over_tor/
Hi we would like to integrate DHT Bittorrent Syncing over Tor for our
open source encrypted obfuscated media rich notepad app.
This app will have for main objective to provide a secure information
gathering and sharing t
On 08/08/16 01:22, Jeremy Rand wrote:
>> And most certainly any external layer must be capable of having
>> nodes binding natively in the Tor / I2P / etc networks, and
>> preferably being strictly private entirely within them (like how
>> private Tor / I2P / Bitcoin nets can be deployed by generati
grarpamp:
> Hi Jeremy.
Hey grarpamp,
Sorry for the delayed reply.
> In regard your post 'Tor and Namecoin' here...
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-July/011245.html
>
> In this thread prefixed 'Onioncat and Prop224' started and
> spanning from here through now...
> https://
Hi Jeremy.
In regard your post 'Tor and Namecoin' here...
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-July/011245.html
In this thread prefixed 'Onioncat and Prop224' started and
spanning from here through now...
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-April/010847.html
Onionc
Freenet has talk on their lists of adding 100 new onioncat nodes
to tor and i2p as linked to in this thread...
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-June/011108.html
Is anyone working on resurrecting the onioncat
mailing list and archives?
___
On 2016-05-26 13:37, George Kadianakis wrote:
> str4d writes:
>
>> [ text/plain ]
>> On 27/04/16 22:31, grarpamp wrote:
>>> On 4/25/16, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote:
> On 22 Apr 2016, at 17:03, grarpamp wrote:
>
> FYI: The onioncat folks are interested in collaborating
> w
str4d writes:
> [ text/plain ]
> On 27/04/16 22:31, grarpamp wrote:
>> On 4/25/16, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote:
>>>
On 22 Apr 2016, at 17:03, grarpamp wrote:
FYI: The onioncat folks are interested in collaborating
with tor folks regarding prop224.
https://gitweb.
On 2016-05-01 01:44, str4d wrote:
> On 27/04/16 22:31, grarpamp wrote:
>> On 4/25/16, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote:
>>>
On 22 Apr 2016, at 17:03, grarpamp wrote:
FYI: The onioncat folks are interested in collaborating
with tor folks regarding prop224.
https://gitweb
On 20/05/16 18:23, grarpamp wrote:
> On 4/30/16, str4d wrote:
>> On 27/04/16 22:31, grarpamp wrote:
>>> I think there are a nontrivial number of users interested in, and
>>> using, non-strictly-TCP transport over an IPv6 tunnel interface.
>>> For example, look at users of CJDNS...
>>>
>>> For whic
On 4/30/16, str4d wrote:
> On 27/04/16 22:31, grarpamp wrote:
>> Yep :) And I know Bernhard was hoping to get in touch with Roger
>> on this before long.
>>
>> Basically, prop224 HS being wider than 80 bits will break onioncat's
>> current HS onion <---> IPv6 addressing mechanism.
>>
>> They're lo
On 27/04/16 22:31, grarpamp wrote:
> On 4/25/16, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote:
>>
>>> On 22 Apr 2016, at 17:03, grarpamp wrote:
>>>
>>> FYI: The onioncat folks are interested in collaborating
>>> with tor folks regarding prop224.
>>>
>>> https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/proposals/2
On 4/25/16, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote:
>
>> On 22 Apr 2016, at 17:03, grarpamp wrote:
>>
>> FYI: The onioncat folks are interested in collaborating
>> with tor folks regarding prop224.
>>
>> https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/proposals/224-rend-spec-ng.txt
>
> I'm interested in wh
> On 22 Apr 2016, at 17:03, grarpamp wrote:
> ...
>
> https://www.onioncat.org/
> https://www.cypherpunk.at/onioncat_trac/
>
> FYI: The onioncat folks are interested in collaborating
> with tor folks regarding prop224.
>
> https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/proposals/224-rend-spec-
25 matches
Mail list logo
