arrase: > 2016-11-15 13:23 GMT+01:00 Michael Rogers <[email protected]>: > >> Hi arrase, >> >> Thanks for discovering this bug. Can you describe how Briar's Tor daemon >> conflicts with Orbot? What problems does it cause? Our goal is for Briar >> to be able to operate on the same device as Orbot without problems. >> >> > I do not think it could be called a bug, and definitely not a Briar bug at > all. I find it hard to argue in English, I'm sorry. > > But if it is true that is a problem if more applications follow the same > path as Briar implementing a Tor daemon within the application. > > Briar opens those ports for Tor: > > Tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:59050 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 10019 214952 18753 > Tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:59051 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 10019 213387 18753 > > If Orbot starts first, nothing prevents it from taking ports 59050 and > 59051 as control ports. It is a remote but real possibility and would be > more real when more applications opt for the same solution. > > It's just an argument about changing the hidden service API for Orbot. > > I think there are more strong arguments like that each application can > manage the configuration files of the hidden service to be able to migrate > between devices. > > It does not look very good to make an application that uses the hidden > service as a user identifier and if we lose the device we lose our entire > network of contacts. > > I think they are good arguments for bringing about an improvement in Orbot > APi as proposed by Nathan.
I think we all want to have a nice Intent-based API in Orbot for apps to work with Hidden Services, the real question is: who is going to do the work. That would be a great place for you to start to get involved. .hc -- PGP fingerprint: EE66 20C7 136B 0D2C 456C 0A4D E9E2 8DEA 00AA 5556 https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xE9E28DEA00AA5556 _______________________________________________ List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev To unsubscribe, email: [email protected]
