On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 10:17:51 -0500
David Goulet dgou...@ev0ke.net wrote:
[snip]
A hidden service is created using the key and list of
port/targets, that will persist till configuration reload or the
termination of the tor process.
Now, an HS bound to a control connection might be a
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 03:47:07PM +, Yawning Angel wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 10:17:51 -0500
David Goulet dgou...@ev0ke.net wrote:
[snip]
A hidden service is created using the key and list of
port/targets, that will persist till configuration reload or the
termination of the tor
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 16:11:55 +
Leif Ryge l...@synthesize.us wrote:
[snippity]
However, it seems like in the case of applications which are not
HS-specific this will necessitate keeping another process running
just to keep the HS alive. I'd rather see two modes: one as you
describe, and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
(CCing the hidden-services list.)
On 16/02/15 16:11, Leif Ryge wrote:
If someone has a suggestion for an alternative interface that
can handle applications crashing (possibly before they persist
the list of HSes they need to clean up),
In situations where it is inconvenient / impossible to
manage / rely a bunch of library files, dropping a static
compiled tor in place is handy. Similarly, it should be possible
to completely configure and run tor in that one static
binary and in ram... no other files at all (torrc, geoip, .tor
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 19:35:58 +
Michael Rogers mich...@briarproject.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
(CCing the hidden-services list.)
(Wonder if my reply will bounce.)
On 16/02/15 16:11, Leif Ryge wrote:
If someone has a suggestion for an alternative
As an app developer this strikes me as the right approach. But having
said that, I wouldn't actually need this feature because Briar already
uses __OwningControllerProcess to shut down Tor if the control
connection is closed. I imagine the same would apply to any app that
manages its own Tor
From my perspective, the entire point of this feature is to allow
applications to use the system Tor (or, at least some already-running
tor) to put their hidden services on.
(Or, looking at it another way, if you don't want to share a tor
instance with other applications, you can do that easily
On 2/16/15 11:22 PM, meejah wrote:
I guess to put another way: I can't see a use-case to keep the hidden-
service around if the application that added it went away.
+1 from globaleaks perspective
-naif
___
tor-dev mailing list
On 2/16/15 11:45 PM, grarpamp wrote:
In some unique situations you may not even be
able to spawn/access the control port. So ability
compiling in HS keys etc would be useful there.
There may already be some tickets for these things.
That's that Windows PE files does with PE Resources that
On 14 Feb (00:45:24), Yawning Angel wrote:
Hey Yawning, great stuff btw! I have a questions below regarding
meejah's comment and
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/6411#comment:32
Ephemeral hidden services are tied to the control port connection that
created them. This means, that
Hi,
Yes, I'm also wondering whether the anonymity of low-latency Tor would
increase if we plugged a high-latency network into it, and also the
opposite. I'm curious on whether one network will act as cover traffic
for the other, and what kind of adversaries that would fool.
On this topic
12 matches
Mail list logo
