On Sunday 02 November 2014 00:47:40 coderman wrote: > even a simple one time, "You are about to route your traffic over the > Tor network. Turn off your torrents and don't upgrade poorly written > applications". > > the zero guidance to unsuspecting is what i am most concerned about; > even basic captive portal warning would be a benefit.
I will definitely look into this one. This should be quite easy to implement by messing a bit with the firewall tables :) Only problem I see is that to make it useful I think it would have to time out at some point. One example I have bought up a few times is my cheap and rather chatty media player. I have not dug into the details exactly but I _know_ it "phones home" regularly and it is definitely a use case where the Tor browser bundle would be impossible. Problem is that one is unattended so if I were to do a captive portal kind of page and that would require a positive acceptance, the Cloak would be useless for this scenario. Number of wireless networks are not an issue so I _am_ beginning to think that more than two is necessary. For example: 1. Open - Open network - no Tor 2. Transparent proxy - all tcp traffic allowed - forced through Tor - everything on separate circuits - captive warning 3. Transparent proxy as 2 minus captive portal (for gadgets or someone who know what they are doing) 4. Isolating proxy - only https allowed - forced through Tor - everything on separate circuits and everything else blocked It is not really a problem to make more than two so if this makes the Cloak more flexible I'd say it's the way to go. -- Lars Boegild Thomsen https://reclaim-your-privacy.com Jabber/XMPP: l...@reclaim-your-privacy.com -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
