Hi,
I downloaded the last update of the TBB
(tor-browser-2.3.25-6_en-US.exe), and it keeps on telling it needs
to be updated. I tried every thing (in the about:config the version is
the right one, re-install it, re-download it, etc.). Is someone else
having the same problem? Further more,
*sigh* at the risk that I am feeding a troll rather than helping
someone wellmeaning but misinformed and the hope that some will find
these points useful despite their having been made many times before:
1. Tor not TOR (See
https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq.html.en#WhyCalledTor )
2. was cre
Hi,
In case anyone is interested, I was watching this week's The Following,
episode titled "Whips and Regret," and Tor was mentioned very quickly in
passing, verbatim:
Bad lady that runs online pron sites says at minute 13:34 to 14:50:
"I have some foreign clients, they're into the hardcore ille
Could the government spider .onions just as Google spiders the web? Of
course. But the assertion that hidden services have been compromised as
a concept is plain wrong.
Jacob Henner
On 04/04/2013 01:55 PM, Gregory Disney wrote:
> Just saying TOR was created by the Naval Research Laboratory a part
On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 23:38:40 -0400
cmeclax wrote:
> http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/1
> If the NSA intercepted all Tor traffic, how fast could they decrypt
> it? What are they up against when trying to break Tor?
Wouldn't this question be more appropriate for a cryp
On 04/04/2013 08:25 PM, Christopher Walters wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 23:38:40 -0400
> cmeclax wrote:
>
>> http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/1
>> If the NSA intercepted all Tor traffic, how fast could they decrypt
>> it? What are they up against when trying to break
> Guys, if you are in trouble with NSA, or other US governmentals agency,
> you're screwed. Physically. Don't mind your electronical com'.
Very good calibration sir :)
And come to think of it, being in such trouble might not be so bad,
you might find yourself with a lucrative job offer you can't r
> ill really try not to go conspiracy crazy... but that is always a risk
...
> there is also a video on youtube from a recent con about the feasibility of
> factoring them, <"fast hacks" or something like that>
There are always rational analyses that can be made.
Many analysts think of the availa
Just saying TOR was created by the Naval Research Laboratory a part of
DARPA. Since it's inception they could index, spider and track the dark
net.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:08 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> > Guys, if you are in trouble with NSA, or other US governmentals agency,
> > you're screwed. Phy
One thing i forgot.. The last vpn/ssh tunnel need to be totally secure.
Basically, you need your personnal anon server to do that. If you can't
handle your own service, you'll better stay with tor as the last system in
the pile.
2013/4/4 Alexandre Guillioud
> I'm in a hurry so, i describe a lit
Why not using some exotic scramble of keys/method to encrypt the whole
message ?
The only way to hide/protect us from something we don't know, is putting a
mess in protocols. A big mess.
The point is : How can we unscramble it at the end without revealing the
secret necessary to scramble it ?
Guy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
i wasnt going to, but now i have to...
i dont know what tech or knowledge they have.
but i imagine that if you angered them, and they wanted your keys, they
would come and get them.
physically or electronically.
so lets not speculate :)
i have a l
I'm in a hurry so, i describe a little scenario :
+ Launch a vpn/ssh tunnel service, and secure bind privoxy/proxifier into
it. (this one is for scrambling, linearising data)
+ Launch a system like Privoxy and/or Proxifier
++ Bind several linked proxy (your data will pass thru each of them)
+ Laun
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Alexandre Guillioud <
guillioud.alexan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So, if you're paranoïd, or doing something where paranoïd behavior is
> requested, use a vpn inside and outside tor.
> Use linked proxy's on top of this. You'll be fine.
>
could you elaborate on this a b
So, if you're paranoïd, or doing something where paranoïd behavior is
requested, use a vpn inside and outside tor.
Use linked proxy's on top of this. You'll be fine.
2013/4/4 Alexandre Guillioud
> I may be wrong, but i take for true that NSA as 10 to 30 years advance on
> maths and cryptographi
On Thursday, April 04, 2013 10:51:50 Bernard Tyers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there a reason 1024 bit keys, instead of something higher is not used? Do
> higher bit keys affect host performance, or network latency?
Are you talking about the onion key or the identity key? What about the key
exchange use
I may be wrong, but i take for true that NSA as 10 to 30 years advance on
maths and cryptographic méthod.
Le jeudi 4 avril 2013, George Torwell a écrit :
> i may be wrong but:
> - we are talking about keys of every node along the path. how can you
> increase that just locally?
> - keep in mind t
One ask triggering another :
How do you do a timing attack ? What are the necessary steps to be
successfull in such a thing ? Where can i find some documented timing
attack scenario ?
2013/4/4 Alexandre Guillioud
> My guess is that the Key size is configured right into the node's source
> code.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 5:51 AM, Bernard Tyers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there a reason 1024 bit keys, instead of something higher is not used? Do
> higher bit keys affect host performance, or network latency?
Because in 2003/2004, when we were designing Tor, 1024-bit keys seemed
like they would probab
i may be wrong but:
- we are talking about keys of every node along the path. how can you
increase that just locally?
- keep in mind that we dont know if factoring such a key is likely, if i
remember correctly that talk mentioned huge amounts of computation power
and electricity.
something like
That's what I was thinking, I just didn't know if there was another reasons.
I guess the key size is configured on the Tor node? I haven't found it anywhere
in the configuration (I'm using TBB on OS X).
Is it possible to increase the size of the key, if say I've got a big server
running as a no
My guess is that the Key size is configured right into the node's source
code.
If you apply multiple key size accross the network, you're exposed with the
smallest encryption key of the circuit.
Except for one thing : if somebody can break one of the circuit's key,
depending of the node number into
Hi,
Is there a reason 1024 bit keys, instead of something higher is not used? Do
higher bit keys affect host performance, or network latency?
Thanks,
Bernard
Written on my small electric gadget. Please excuse brevity and (probable)
misspelling.
George Torwell wrote:
a second guess wo
The bigger the key is, the longer (cpu cycle) it take to encrypt/decrypt ?
Le jeudi 4 avril 2013, Bernard Tyers a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> Is there a reason 1024 bit keys, instead of something higher is not used?
> Do higher bit keys affect host performance, or network latency?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Bernard
>
ill really try not to go conspiracy crazy... but that is always a risk
when discussing the NSA on this list :)
if they intercepted everything, there wont be much of a need to decrypt it.
they could watch it going in plaintext to the exit nodes, and use timing attacks and get a pretty good
sense
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/1
If the NSA intercepted all Tor traffic, how fast could they decrypt it? What
are
they up against when trying to break Tor?
___
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
https://li
26 matches
Mail list logo
