to
apply to the assignment of "Authority" flags. Given the current directory
protocol(s) and distribution structure, I'm fine with that arrangement for
the time being for "Authority" flagging, but not for "BadExit" flagging for
the reasons you posted, as wel
very likely combine encrypted and unencrypted versions
>of ports together, removing this option entirely.
>
Here you threaten that the tor project would someday severely reduce
the control that an exit operator would ha
>allows their old ports + 443 and continue sniffing.
Exactly, on all points.
>
>I can not see the Tor project won _anything_ with this decision.
>
Well, they've made clear that they know what's good for exit operators
better than those exit operators do. Perhaps
s*
to be undergoing a major philosophical change toward nannying the tor user
community, a direction I find very unappealing, to say the least. Horrifying
might be a more appropriate word.
Sco
ease
re-enable them, at
least for this site, or for HTTPS connections, or for 'same-origin' requests.
More information is available with DEBUG=True.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
***
The Republicants are back to pushing data retention legislation. :-(
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20029393-281.html#ixzz1C6p2U2fR
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
On Mon, 8 Nov 2010 04:28:17 + (UTC) John Case
wrote:
>On Sun, 7 Nov 2010, Scott Bennett wrote:
>
>>
>> Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
>
>
>What do those two acronyms (ASMELG, CFIAG) mean ?
They're a summary of my
On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:33:23 -0500 Joe Btfsplk
wrote:
>On 11/2/2010 3:01 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:22:07 + Erinn Clark
>> wrote:
>>> NoScript
>>> - majority of options are disabled
>> Erinn, I'm not s
On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 14:17:20 + "Geoff Down"
wrote:
>On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 08:05 -0600, "Jon" wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> > I wrote:
>> >>http://news.antiwar.com/2010/11/05/us-censors-muslim-w
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 16:03:24 -0500 David Carlson
wrote:
>On 11/6/2010 1:02 PM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> I wrote:
>>> http://news.antiwar.com/2010/11/05/us-censors-muslim-websites-list-of-=
>british-mps-who-supported-iraq-war/
>>>
>>> Usi
ent
>that the reason is due to DNS hijacking that is probably related to U.S.
>censorship.
I changed my mind. I'm adding {ca},{uk},{us} to my ExcludeExitNodes
list with an appropriate comment for later removal in case the U.S. ever
calls off its War on the Internet. :-(
o DNS hijacking that is probably related to U.S.
censorship.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennet
ller analysis available.
>
Okay. You might want to look through all the stuff on the NoScript
web pages to get a better understanding of the extensive list of pretty awful
leakages and attacks that NoScript can block.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, C
it the postal address lines anyway as below.
Although I didn't respond directly to Jon's reply, I'd like to thank
him for his update and its reassurance.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
*
s a security violation that is only intended for
debugging a problem, not for normal use. Read the documentation
about it.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/fbi-backdoor-access-mail-texts/story?id=11825039
(Beware of linewrap in the URL.)
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu
s
above would be helpful, though, in making those modifications.
However, I don't understand the need for compatibility for tor
controllers on this one. It seems to me that changes to the ExcludeNodes
and ExcludeExitNodes lists are the kind of thing that should require
rereading torrc, thr
On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 04:40:02 -0400 Roger Dingledine
wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 03:27:01AM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> >Yup, that's the actual behaviour. Good thing we added the warn,
>> >otherwise
>> >it might have gone unnoticed longer.
>&g
On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:05:09 +0200 Sebastian Hahn
wrote:
>On Sep 10, 2010, at 9:57 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 03:39:44 -0400 Roger Dingledine
>> wrote:
>>> As I understand it, we changed no behavior except printing out a warn
>>&g
On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 03:39:44 -0400 Roger Dingledine
wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 01:36:18AM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> I had planned to upgrade my node from 0.2.2.14-alpha this evening to
>> 0.2.2.15-alpha, but there is an unfortunate and apparently gratuitous, new
iple ExcludeExitNodes and ExcludeNodes lines again. Thank you.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
ere
>> there are/have been genuine attempts to provide full anonymity, no get
>> out clause.
>
>Nice story, bro.
>
Relax, Jake. He/she did write "attempts", which, of course, neither
equates to nor impli
again and with greater care. There
is, AFAIK, only one parameter that does what you asked for, and that one is
MaxCircuitDirtiness. That is also clear from the man page.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
*
o use both NoScript and Torbutton together.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu *
*---
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 01:18:36 -0700 Seth David Schoen
wrote:
>Scott Bennett writes:
>
>> While HTTPS-Everywhere may be a nice programming exercise for its
>> author(s), it appears wholly unnecessary for Firefox users because Firefox
>> users should *ALREADY*
pt, then sooner or later you and/or the OP will get burned and
will thus be taught the hard way the lesson you should have understood by
now.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.e
raffic by default?
>
>Then maybe like how Adblock plus is - "Disable on this page only"
>allows http traffic only for that page?
AFAIK, NoScript doesn't discriminate among individual pages, only
by host+domainname. It does allow the use of wildcards in the
ll need to maintain (ie.
>update) it.
>
What a strange thing to say! How can you credibly claim to know the
availability requirements for other persons' hidden services?
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 02:42:09 + Orionjur Tor-admin
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>> There are three nodes currently listed in the directory by the names of
>> DerAufbruch, DerAufbruch1, and DerAufbruch2 without contact information that
>> are not configured into a
he "bad exits" issue, so maybe
the directory authorities ought to have a way of enforcing Family groupings
in a manner similar to the BadExit flag or the Invalid flag. Any thoughts
on this from others, including developers?
,$72EABEEEA8290EE39A44A3E06676071B98D17EBD
(Beware of linewrap in the NodeFamily line above.)
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu
On Fri, 28 May 2010 12:55:19 -0700 Seth David Schoen
wrote:
>Scott Bennett writes:
>
>> What seems to be missing from this discussion is the fact that NoScript
>> already supports forcing HTTPS on a site-by-site or pattern basis. You
>> should be using NoS
be missing from this discussion is the fact that NoScript
already supports forcing HTTPS on a site-by-site or pattern basis. You
should be using NoScript already if you use Firefox, so just tell it what
to do.
On Thu, 27 May 2010 12:49:26 -0600 Jim wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 May 2010 09:40:29 -0400 "Aplin, Justin M"
>> wrote:
>>> I don't know about gwget, but plain wget supports http proxies, which
>>> you can point at Polip
a lot you can add the following lines to your .wgetrc file
>to have them executed automatically:
>
>proxy = on
>HTTP_PROXY = 127.0.0.1:8118
>HTTPS_PROXY = 127.0.0.1:8118
>FTP_PROXY = 127.0.0.1:8118
See note above.
>
>
Mike and Moritz,
Would you both *please* stop posting each message to multiple lists?
Thanks much.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu
On Tue, 25 May 2010 13:33:23 -0400 Ted Smith
wrote:
>On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 01:45 -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> I don't know who "Censorship Research Center" might be, but they claim
>> to have a development project going for another encrypted proxy service.
&
On Tue, 25 May 2010 05:55:34 -0400 "Aplin, Justin M"
wrote:
>On 5/25/2010 4:59 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> You may well be assuming too much. It's not easy to know at this
>> point because it's still undocumented vaporware. I still think the
>&g
On Tue, 25 May 2010 03:30:34 -0400 Justin Aplin
wrote:
>On May 25, 2010, at 2:45 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>
>> I don't know who "Censorship Research Center" might be, but they
>> claim
>> to have a development project going for another encrypted p
ns tor, complaining about
tor's publicly available directory and arguing that their method is better,
while not mentioning bridges.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Interne
Hi Paul,
On Thu, 20 May 2010 15:12:38 -0400 Paul Syverson
wrote:
>On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 01:44:36PM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> Oh. My. Goodness. Gracious! I go to sleep for a few hours, and the
>> discussion descends into total confusion because a number
me) by running no node at all.
>
Exactly. Thank you, Moritz. Roger just didn't read what Bruce wrote.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.e
't use more than one of us in a circuit." It does not allow
any node to specify other nodes. A node simply specifies the name of a Family
to which it belongs. Jeesh. It's really not very difficult, and no, it is
not v
On Thu, 20 May 2010 07:37:17 + The23rd Raccoon
wrote:
>On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:47 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> =A0 =A0 On Thu, 20 May 2010 00:40:42 -0400 =3D?utf-8?Q?Jerzy_=3DC5=3D81og=
>iewa?=3D
>> wrote:
>>>I apologize for altering the nature of this
stop me from listing nodes
that I don't control in a MyFamily statement now?
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu *
*---
a difficult time following the threads.
>
If you subscribed to this list after the start of the thread, just
go to the list archives, and look for my original message. It should
all then become clear.
Scott Bennett, Comm
to my node's torrc that included all four blutmagie
nodes?
>
>We need to have each set of relays in a family declare the others,
>or it's open to attacks like this.
>
All that would do would be to say to all clients, "Don't include
this node in
with, apparently, the addition
of 17 more node fingerprints that I missed when I grepped the directory for
the email address from the contact info.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
***
escription in the tor man page. Then
look at what I posted before about the perfect-privacy.com nodes being
misconfigured w.r.t. Family designations. Their operator(s) did it wrong
and have not responded to email sent to the address in those nodes'
contact information.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu *
**
* "A well regulate
someone
else would require grouping them with perfect-privacy.com's nodes. Thanks
in advance for any answers to these questions!
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu
ave not thoroughly combed the directory for similar cases.
It is entirely possible that others exist, but for now, it would be good
to eliminate the violators ASAP.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
hat sort of variability he see
anyway. Does he mean that it is erratic on a minute-to-minute basis? Or
at various times of day? The graphs at the link he gave appeared damaged
in Firefox, appearing as straight, horizontal lines (yes, plural) in and
below the graph boundaries.
(O), but if you don't have pf(4) support on your
system (OpenBSD and FreeBSD only, I think), then you don't have pftop
available. I don't know what similar tools may be available for use with
other syste
On Thu, 06 May 2010 15:56:25 +0200 Jacob Appelbaum
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>> On Thu, 06 May 2010 11:05:17 +0200 Jacob Appelbaum m.net>
>> wrote:
>>> Scott Bennett wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2010 20:22:55 +0200 Borja Luaces il=3D
>>
On Thu, 06 May 2010 11:05:17 +0200 Jacob Appelbaum
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>> On Wed, 5 May 2010 20:22:55 +0200 Borja Luaces =2Ecom>
>> wrote:
>>> I would like to know if it is possible to use tor as proxy for the com=
>mand
>>> line under li
line
>(wget, nmap,...)
>
Note that wget(1) abides by the ftp_proxy and http_proxy environment
variables described in fetch(3). I suspect that torify(1) used with nmap
will not be particularly useful to you nor would you endear yourself to
exit operators by doing that.
series of circuit
construction time, where the smoother is 5000 values wide, how can such jumps
occur? I guess I don't understand what algorithm is being used here. Any
clarification would be appreciated. Thanks in advance!
Scott Bennett, Comm
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 13:07:24 +0200 Hans Schnehl
wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 01:35:20AM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 13:36:17 -0400 Flamsmark
>> wrote:
>> >On 26 April 2010 09:59, Timo Schoeler wrote:
>> >
>> >> (De
>addresses on public mailing lists.
>
That is a good idea for client IP addresses, to be sure. However,
any relay already has its IP address made public in the consensus and the
directory. And I have no qualms at all about m
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 06:45:38 -0400 Roger Dingledine
wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 08:51:32PM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> I hope that, in the future, openssl.org will make some effort to
>> coordinate such things with the various operating system developers in
>&
one so affected.
>But we haven't yet put out a stable release that includes that patch.
>
>So if you upgraded to the latest 0.2.2.x-alpha to get the fixes for other
>bugs, you would get the fix for this bug too. Let us know if it works.
>
Are there any ideas
us problems over that:-), so this system would not have registered
itself at either of the sites mentioned in the latter article.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
manner, were only systems running tor relays attacked,
who shut it off, etc. If anyone else on this list noticed anything between
5:00 a.m. CDT and 8:00 a.m. CDT, please post the details here. Thanks!
ur directory
fetch circuit timeout patch, at least as a temporary fix that might be
replaced by something better in 0.2.2.13-alpha?
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett a
It's certainly worth further investigation. A phone call to the ISP
>to find out what its policies and practices are about daily reboots and
>so on might be well worth your time.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Int
ctices are about daily reboots and
so on might be well worth your time.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu *
*--
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 21:29:04 -0700 Jacob Appelbaum
wrote:
>Roger Dingledine wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:59:31PM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
>>> My weather satellite images got blocked again, due to the Privacy=
>Now
>>> exit using OpenDNS with a
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 13:21:33 -0400 Roger Dingledine
wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:59:31PM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> My weather satellite images got blocked again, due to the PrivacyNow
>> exit using OpenDNS with a misconfigured account and the fact that
>
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 09:54:31 -0500 Bill Weiss
wrote:
>Scott Bennett(benn...@cs.niu.edu)@Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 03:18:47AM -0500:
>> On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:54:16 -0400 Andrew Lewman
>> wrote:
>> >I may be misunderstanding the "using opendns with a misconf
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:54:16 -0400 Andrew Lewman
wrote:
>On 04/16/2010 12:59 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> My weather satellite images got blocked again, due to the PrivacyNow
>> exit using OpenDNS with a misconfigured account and the fact that
>> ExcludeExitNod
digest of each program that is allowed to have network access, and
when an already approved program tries to use the network, its checksum
or digest is calculated afresh and compared with the one already on
record. If it has changed, then the
On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:42:26 +0200 Olaf Selke
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>>
>> Olaf, if you're awake and on-line at/near this hour:-), how about
>> an update, now that blutmagie has been running long enough to complete
>> its climb to FL510 and acceler
consensus? Thanks!
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu *
**
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:04:06 -0400 zzzjethro...@email2me.net
top-posted (again, please stop doing that):
> Scott Bennett wrote:
>
>
> "That is why tor is distributed with a complete set of documentation."
>
>Okay, great. I will read it but all I have in my Ho
On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:17:39 +0200 Sebastian Hahn
wrote:
>On Apr 15, 2010, at 9:11 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 08:25:07 +0200 Sebastian Hahn
>> > >
>> wrote:
>>> On Apr 15, 2010, at 8:17 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>>>&
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:23:35 +0200 Olaf Selke
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>
>>>
>>> It appears memory consumption with the wrapped Linux malloc() is still
>>> larger than than with openbsd-malloc I used before. Hugepages don't
>>> appear to w
On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 08:25:07 +0200 Sebastian Hahn
wrote:
>On Apr 15, 2010, at 8:17 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> Unfortunate (IMO), the latest versions have the support for .exit
>> either disabled or deleted, apparently leaving us no easy way to
>> perform
>&
yourself, are the maintainer of your own client's ExcludeExitNodes
and ExcludeNodes lists in your torrc file.
Meanwhile, I see that PrivacyNow still has the following flags
assigned to it in the consensus document:
s Exit Fast HSDir Named Running Stable V2Dir Valid
I ask again that t
Hi Arjan,
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 22:03:33 +0200 Arjan
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:10:37 +0200 Arjan
>> wrote:
>>> Scott Bennett wrote:
>>>> BTW, I know that there are *lots* of tor relays running on LINUX
>>>> sys
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:10:37 +0200 Arjan
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>> BTW, I know that there are *lots* of tor relays running on LINUX
>> systems whose operators are subscribed to this list. Don't leave Olaf and
>> me here swinging in the breeze. Plea
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:23:35 +0200 Olaf Selke
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>
>>>
>>> It appears memory consumption with the wrapped Linux malloc() is still
>>> larger than than with openbsd-malloc I used before. Hugepages don't
>>> appear to w
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:00:52 +0200 Olaf Selke
wrote:
>Christian Kujau wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 at 05:58, Scott Bennett wrote:
>>> and straighten us out. Remember that Olaf runs the highest-load-bearing
>>> tor node in our whole network, and there are
authorities know
how to reach the operator of PrivacyNow to get his/her OpenDNS configuration
fixed (or switched to Google's open name servers or something similar), will
the authorities please flag PrivacyNow as a BadExit ASAP
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 18:18:02 -0700 (PDT) Christian Kujau
wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 at 05:58, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> and straighten us out. Remember that Olaf runs the highest-load-bearing
>> tor node in our whole network, and there are at least two or four dozen
>>
etter"?
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu *
**
* "A well regulated and disc
eExitNodes list. :-(
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu *
**
* &q
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:10:37 +0200 Arjan
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>> BTW, I know that there are *lots* of tor relays running on LINUX
>> systems whose operators are subscribed to this list. Don't leave Olaf and
>> me here swinging in the breeze. Plea
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 18:15:18 +0200 Olaf Selke
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>
>> Now that you've had tor running for a while, what does a
>> "cat /proc/meminfo | grep -i hugepage" show you? Also, 126 such pages
>> equal 256 MB of memory. Is tha
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 05:16:33 -0500 (CDT) I wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:04:36 +0200 Olaf Selke
>wrote:
>>Scott Bennett wrote:
>>
>>> Either I forgot (probable) or you didn't mention before (less probable)
>>> that you had moved it to a n
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:04:36 +0200 Olaf Selke
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>
>> Either I forgot (probable) or you didn't mention before (less probable)
>> that you had moved it to a newer machine. Whatever you're running it on,
>> superpages or LINUX
you. It tells your client,
basically, to "mark all existing circuits as being too old to use for new
streams" and to "build three new circuits proactively".
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
*
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 08:43:21 +0200 Olaf Selke
wrote:
>Scott Bennett schrieb:
>> In any case, your Xeon(s) ought to be able to benefit considerably from
>> running your gargantuan tor process in 4 MB pages instead of 4 KB pages.
>
>the old blutmagie exit running in 2
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 10:05:06 -0600 Kasimir Gabert
wrote:
>On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> =A0 =A0 On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 15:23:16 +0200 Olaf Selke ie.de>
>> wrote:
> [snipped]
>>>
>>>maybe I take your advice and add php code at bl
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 15:23:16 +0200 Olaf Selke
wrote:
>Scott Bennett schrieb:
>>
>> I see I missed the implication in Olaf's main complaint above, which
>> is that the authorities are advertising more capacity for his node than
>> his node is advertising
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 06:12:43 -0500 (CDT) I wrote:
>Hi Olaf,
> On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 12:11:36 +0200 Olaf Selke
>wrote:
>>Scott Bennett schrieb:
>>
>>> Observed by what? If it has anything to do with the numbers
>>> given in the consensus doc
Hi Olaf,
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 12:11:36 +0200 Olaf Selke
wrote:
>Scott Bennett schrieb:
>
>> Observed by what? If it has anything to do with the numbers
>> given in the consensus documents, then the only value such graphs
>> would have would be for the purpose o
ing those graphs with the
values reported by the relays themselves. The values in the consensus
documents alone are, a priori, worthless.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
on of all ports as an exit policy.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu *
**
* "A well
On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 11:29:57 +0200 Mitar wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> It wouldn't be airtight, to be sure, but it would
>> greatly shrink the window of opportunity for censors to cut bridge users
>> off from the tor network.
>
1 - 100 of 750 matches
Mail list logo
