[tor-dev] Reverse Naming Proposals?

These recent naming proposals on list, for forward naming 'string --> onion, 1:1', I think. Is anyone working on doing reverse naming, 'onion --> string, 1:1' ? With links to such work? ___ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@lists.torproject.org

Re: [tor-dev] Comments on proposal 279 (Name API)

It was suggested I post this to tor-dev; I prototyped a small thing that allows the prop-279 APIs to be tested against actual-Tor without changing Tor. That is, it does the "abuse the control-protocol" thing but speaks to prop-279 style subprocesses. This is just proof-of-concept and would need

[tor-dev] Adding Single Onion Service support to Bitcoin Core

Core is preparing to support this new tor feature. Any helpful suggestions would be appreciated. :) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9836 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10161 Thanks for all the great onion work! James ___ tor-dev

Re: [tor-dev] Control-port filtering: can it have a reasonable threat model?

> Yes, that is necessary. I question, however, whether it is sufficient. Sufficient for what purpose? It *is* sufficient for the purpose of preventing Subgraph sandboxed applications from escaping it's sandbox via the Tor control port. Actually, one of the Subgraph guys figured this out and

Re: [tor-dev] minimizing traffic for IoT Tor node over 3G/LTE

Razvan Dragomirescu: > Thank you, Proposal 140 sounds perfect for what I need, that would minimize > traffic quite a bit! I see some code for it at > https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/log/?qt=grep=prop140 , I'm guessing > it's not complete yet. Relevant ticket:

Re: [tor-dev] Comments on proposal 279 (Name API)

On Sat, 8 Apr 2017 08:47:51 +0100 Alec Muffett wrote: > However: on this conference call it was made abundantly clear to all > present - one could almost hear fingers being wagged - that it would > be a bad thing for Onion addresses to (1) contain anything other than >

Re: [tor-dev] minimizing traffic for IoT Tor node over 3G/LTE

Thank you, Proposal 140 sounds perfect for what I need, that would minimize traffic quite a bit! I see some code for it at https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/log/?qt=grep=prop140 , I'm guessing it's not complete yet. Thanks again, Razvan On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 12:43 PM, nusenu

Re: [tor-dev] minimizing traffic for IoT Tor node over 3G/LTE

> I am working on a project to create very small Tor nodes on embedded > devices connected over LTE or 3G. since you are concerned about bw usage I assume you talk about tor clients not relays. > I have it working fine with OpenWRT and > just 128MB of RAM, but the main issue is now the amount of

[tor-dev] minimizing traffic for IoT Tor node over 3G/LTE

Hello, I am working on a project to create very small Tor nodes on embedded devices connected over LTE or 3G. I have it working fine with OpenWRT and just 128MB of RAM, but the main issue is now the amount of data needed to download the consensus. The consensus files appear to be around 2.3MB at

Re: [tor-dev] Comments on proposal 279 (Name API)

On 8 April 2017 at 03:23, Yawning Angel wrote: > On Fri, 7 Apr 2017 11:44:03 +0100 > Alec Muffett wrote: > > If I was in charge, I would say that we risk overthinking this, and it > > would be better to: > > > >- mandate use of fully