On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 10:41:26AM +0800, luweit...@gmail.com wrote 1.0K bytes
in 28 lines about:
: Bridge :
: cannot be present. I hear that it's because fingerprint
: checking is blocked.
You heard wrong. We disabled the fingerprint requirement for bridges.
It is still good practice to includ
On Mon, 27 Dec 2010 10:41:26 +0800
Lu Wei wrote:
> Gitano wrote on 2010-12-24 3:23:
> > On 2010-12-23 06:49, Lu Wei wrote:
> >
> >> Only a little inconvenience is that bridge address must be entered
> >> digitally.
> >
> > You can also use the following Syntax:
> >
> >Bridge :
> > ***
Gitano wrote on 2010-12-24 3:23:
> On 2010-12-23 06:49, Lu Wei wrote:
>
>> Only a little inconvenience is that bridge address must be entered
>> digitally.
>
> You can also use the following Syntax:
>
>Bridge :
> ***
> To u
On 2010-12-23 06:49, Lu Wei wrote:
> Only a little inconvenience is that bridge address must be entered
> digitally.
You can also use the following Syntax:
Bridge :
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.
and...@torproject.org wrote on 2010-12-21 22:08:
> ...
Thank you for the confirmation. Someone kindly gave me a private bridge,
it failed yesterday but worked today. I think that's because it's a
dynamic address. Fortunately they have not blocked all dynamic DNS
service. Only a little inconvenienc
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 03:34:29PM +0800, luweit...@gmail.com wrote 1.0K bytes
in 21 lines about:
: Could someone confirm that tor has been defeated in china? I mean
: running tor natively, not "capped" or through another proxy.
The Chinese GFW team has been actively blocking all public relays si
Even if tor has retrieved 1260 relays, even if tor connect through 20+
bridges, circuit cannot be established. Sometimes after hundreds of
"[Warning] Problem bootstrapping. Stuck at xx%: Finishing handshake with
first hop. (DONE; DONE; count xxx; recommendation warn)" it says
connected to tor netwo
7 matches
Mail list logo
