About a day ago, I added a list of obsolete nodes, mostly running 0.1.*.*
releases, to my ExcludeNodes list in torrc. One of those was TSL. I still
see TSL being chosen for routes for circuits. I've noticed such apparent
violations and commented upon them previously here.
What I don't
On 30.04.09 00:24, Tripple Moon wrote:
Yes I agree that those other factors, which were not mentioned yet, are
ofcourse also elements to take into account for differences. And like i
previously already admitted this is a difficult topic to make foolproof.
Actually you don't come with any
Hiya
I got this question to ask, and I know to some it will be a very silly
Q, but im hoping you will see the light and in the spirit that im asking
this.
Why does Tor not too use or support UDP?
I know its stateless in nature ( could error handling be handled but Tor
), but the point im
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 04:39:07PM +0200, Brent Clark wrote:
Why does Tor not too use or support UDP?
I know its stateless in nature ( could error handling be handled but Tor
), but the point im trying to make is, and I know you all know, with UDP
there will be less overhead and to my
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:14:35 -0500 (CDT)
Scott Bennett benn...@cs.niu.edu wrote:
Those methods are all very nice, but do not address the clients'
security problems. Warm and fuzzy feelings that tor node operators,
who often do *not* put contact information into their torrc files,
Yes,
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 23:57:17 -0500 (CDT)
Scott Bennett benn...@cs.niu.edu wrote:
In general, these options seem a fine way to partition the tor
network. Possibly more so for new releases and arbitraging the time
during which clients and relays upgrade. Tor clients already don't
trust the relays.
6 matches
Mail list logo
