Are you suggesting something? XD I can take a look at the problem and propose a solution, it will not be fast but I can do it.
Tonight I will try to compile Orbot from sources and try to familiarize myself with the code. (Is there a wiki with info??) How do you want to focus the change? What should be possible by a third party? In my opinion: - Be able to register a hidden service for your ports without sharing it with other applications. - Be able to backup the configuration files in order to migrate the service. - Everything should be possible without root It would be nice if all this was possible without giving access to the Tor configuration port, but right now I can not think of how to do it. I keep thinking ..... after working, I'll dedicate some time to the problem 2016-11-15 14:19 GMT+01:00 Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@guardianproject.info >: > > > arrase: > > 2016-11-15 13:23 GMT+01:00 Michael Rogers <mich...@briarproject.org>: > > > >> 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: guardian-dev-unsubscr...@lists.mayfirst.org >
_______________________________________________ List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev To unsubscribe, email: guardian-dev-unsubscr...@lists.mayfirst.org
