On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 11:51:29PM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
> Nine server council... a hoseablitly focus point similar to Tor dirauths.
> In any case... interesting.
The privaTegrity (PT) backdoor is significantly more malignant than the
Tor dirauth issue.
If you pwn the Tor dirauths, you can sign
On Sat, Apr 05, 2014 at 09:30:25PM -0700, coderman wrote:
> for any decent attacker, mobile platforms are just fucked. sorry!
> this is true until you can implement an entire isolated SDR stack;
> even opaque wifi blobs are fail.
> [i've stated my preference for various software defined radio set
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 06:42:51PM +, Trigger Happy wrote:
> Check out new Tor distro - Linux Kodachi
>
> http://www.digi77.com/linux-kodachi/
>
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/linuxkodachi/
A new project that was foolish enough to select sourceforge as their
hosting? That, alone, is disq
Hi Marco,
Please discuss the DoS in public forums, I'm not interested in helping
you hide details of your supposed attack. The norms for open source
development may conflict with your expectations of scientific papers,
but that's your problem not ours.
-andy
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:47:37AM +
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 06:33:14PM +0100, Moritz Bartl wrote:
> I see a lot of scary warnings in the Tor logs on our high bandwidth
> nodes (>400 Mbps): "Error binding network socket: Address already in use".
We recently saw this on noisetor until we set tcp_tw_recycle = 1.
https://www.noisebridg
