On 2/6/2013 3:26 AM, Roger Dingledine wrote:
>
> 1) Continued my rampage to teach law enforcement groups about Tor,
> including a US DEA talk, a Dutch regional police talk, a Belgian FCCU
> talk, and a Dutch KPN talk
What a hero.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
__
On 1/30/2013 6:08 PM, Andrew Lewman wrote:
> PIR-Tor is another idea, not quite DHT, not quite the current model,
> http://www.usenix.org/events/sec11/tech/full_papers/Mittal.pdf
Hmm. I don't think a DHT is strictly-speaking what I'd recommend, but if
a bunch of men with guns arrested the admini
On 1/31/2013 12:26 AM, grarpamp wrote:
> Text of possible interest to anons...
>
> Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4941
Pretty important.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 1/30/2013 11:58 AM, unknown wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 19:49:23 -0600
> Raynardine wrote:
>
>> I just wanted to ask here in Tor-Talk where the efforts to decentralize
>> the Tor directory servers have gone so far?
> One of the goals of centralizing is protect Tor ag
On 1/29/2013 8:02 PM, Micah Lee wrote:
> On 01/29/2013 05:40 PM, Raynardine wrote:
>> If I cannot post here via Tormail, I'm excluded from the list completely.
>>
>> I really hope the admins can fix this.
> Do you remember what you had to say about this TBB deb packa
I just wanted to ask here in Tor-Talk where the efforts to decentralize
the Tor directory servers have gone so far?
How far along is the Bridge Community idea?
How far along is the Directory Server decentralization in general?
How is the idea of breaking up the Tor relay list into smaller groups
On 1/29/2013 6:07 PM, adrelanos wrote:
> Raynardine:
>> Maybe I'm having email server issues? I'm sure I sent one.
> I am sure you have. I had issues with tormail as well.
>
> Check the archive. It's not there.
>
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/
y side includes decisions such as choosing "Tor
> encryption" over SSL, remaining within a closed network, stream
> isolation, etc.
> Raynardine, thank you for your thoughtful response. I understand and
> support your concerns, but also think that there are different lev
On 1/29/2013 5:07 PM, adrelanos wrote:
> Raynardine:
>> On 1/29/2013 2:49 PM, adrelanos wrote:
>>> I find this awesome, but I wonder why there was not a single reply from
>>> anyone.
>>>
>>> It's been said, that Linux integration of TBB could
On 1/29/2013 2:49 PM, adrelanos wrote:
> I find this awesome, but I wonder why there was not a single reply from
> anyone.
>
> It's been said, that Linux integration of TBB could be better and now
> someone is here to help but totally ignored.
>
> Everyone busy with other stuff?
Awww.
I see I don
Thank you.
To elaborate on those points:
1) Encrypted end-to-end (or "Tor" to "Tor")
The end to end encryption (AKA "E2E") is one of the most important
design aspects that could possibly exist.
2) Therefore not dependent on SSL
SSL/TLS would be fine it they did not rely on Certificate Auth
On 1/29/2013 9:20 AM, k e bera wrote:
> In the clearnet case, operators are accountable for their public promises and
> by established norms and legalities of internet behaviour.
What accountability? You mean the nice kind policemen in their blue
shirts and shiny Justice-delivering guns?
Sure,
On 1/29/2013 6:48 AM, Katya Titov wrote:
> Raynardine :
>
>> I do not like connecting to clearnet services from Tor.
>>
>> I am not alone in this.
>>
>> There are arguments about the reasons why Tor hidden services can be
>> better than clearnet service
On 1/29/2013 6:39 AM, Katya Titov wrote:
> Raynardine :
>
>> I do not like connecting to clearnet services from Tor.
>>
>> I am not alone in this.
>>
>> There are arguments about the reasons why Tor hidden services can be
>> better than clearnet service
On 1/28/2013 3:41 PM, The Doctor wrote:
> On 01/26/2013 10:29 PM, Raynardine wrote:
>
> > I did not realize that Bitcoin was capable of accepting incoming
> > connections via Tor. This should be a standard feature of the
> > mainline Bitcoin client.
>
> If I r
On 1/27/2013 11:57 AM, Johnathan Corgan wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Raynardine wrote:
>
>
>> I did not realize that Bitcoin was capable of accepting incoming
>> connections via Tor.
>>
>> This should be a standard feature of the mainline Bitc
On 1/27/2013 10:16 AM, Moritz Bartl wrote:
> Hi Raynardine,
>
> On 27.01.2013 04:47, Raynardine wrote:
>> I think better engagement with the Tor community would be easier with a
>> StatusNet instance run as a hidden service.
>> I also think that a mailing list mirror o
On 1/26/2013 6:02 PM, Moritz Bartl wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I often feel a lot of potentially useful input by the Tor community is
> lost because questions raised are not communicated well to the community.
>
> [...]
>
> Instead of just complaining about it, I want to do help:
I think better engagement w
On 1/26/2013 1:31 PM, k e bera wrote:
> For the use case mentioned: being one of 40 to 150 people using Tor (or
> BitCoin) in a low tech country like Uganda could be enough to get you under
> surveillance, at which point no amount of padding will help you, so hopefully
> you would be using some
On 1/26/2013 12:23 PM, Johnathan Corgan wrote:
> Now whether this kind of chaff makes any difference to a correlation attack
> I have no idea =)
I did not realize that Bitcoin was capable of accepting incoming
connections via Tor.
This should be a standard feature of the mainline Bitcoin client.
On 1/26/2013 8:57 AM, adrelanos wrote:
> Question:
> Isn't it significantly more difficult for the adversary to find out who
> is behind Alice's actions, when choosing Behavior B? It gets more
> difficult than just comparing time stamps?
I think that dummy traffic on sustained circuits to one's e
On 1/25/2013 9:08 AM, adrelanos wrote:
> Will visiting x.onion and y.onion result in using different streams?
>
> Is identity correlation at risk?
>
> (Assumed both of them go through the same SocksPort or TransPort.)
> ___
> tor-talk mailing list
> tor-
Ah, alright. Fair enough.
On 1/24/2013 4:20 AM, Alexandre Guillioud wrote:
>
> Not in maths college/major, but interested in :D
>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
https://list
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello, I am a math student in college. I'm interested in tor and
cryptography in general.
I just thought I'd say hello.
Is anyone else here a mathematics major in university?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (MingW32)
Comment: U
24 matches
Mail list logo
