On 27/10/2018 12:50, Piyush Kumar Sharma wrote:
> 2.) What was the motivation to bring in meek as a pluggable transport,
> given the fact that obfs4 works great to cover all the existing problems
> with Tor detection. Was the motivation just the fact that, it will be
> much easier for the users to
On Mon, 29 Oct 2018, Michael Rogers wrote:
>
> If anyone on the list knows whether/when we're likely to see a pluggable
> transport based on encrypted SNI I'd love to hear about it.
There was a thread on this topic recently:
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2018-September/013453.ht
Firefox Nightly let’s you manually enable it. I’d wait until at least
Firefox and Chromium add support to avoid setting off red flags for a
censor. Having collateral damage is important with pluggable transports 😑
Cordially,
Nathaniel
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:25 AM Nicolas Vigier
wrote:
> On
On 26 Oct (13:31:27), Dr. Brandon Wiley wrote:
> Well I think this is a great feature and it's something which people have
> been requesting for a while now, and which I know was discussed at the PT
> meeting at the last TorDev. I think this is the sort of feature that just
> makes transports bette
And here's a link that actually works:
https://storm.torproject.org/shared/Kw99Ow0ExZFFC6FKD5CeryfVFAoAL9Z_iEVlflI0fiL
On 10/26/18 1:34 PM, Richard Pospesel wrote:
> Hey y'all,
>
> For the past little while I've been working on a technical overview doc for
> #3600 (Prevent redirects from transmi
On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 05:20:06PM +0530, Piyush Kumar Sharma wrote:
> 3.) I searched a lot but could not find the timeline in which pluggable
> transports were built. As in what was developed and deployed first, obfs4 or
> meek?
For questions like this, see our metrics timeline page:
https://trac