Thus spake Jacob Appelbaum (ja...@appelbaum.net):
18:10 @cjd If someone (with government hat?) tells you they can make
your
life hell... I wouldn't fault them for doing what the man says.
18:10 @cjd *wouldn't fault you
18:10 +eleitl I'll try bugging some Tor developers about that
On 10/6/12, Mike Perry mikepe...@torproject.org wrote:
Yet still, as Roger and Robert point out, there are some serious
questions about the viability of decentralized directory/consensus
systems. Or, at least questions that sexified attack papers can make to
seem serious. (For example: I
Eugen Leitl:
18:08 @cjd I trust them to make the software right, esp. since I could
check if they did.
18:09 @cjd But a little arm twisting can change someone's motives pretty
fast.
18:09 +eleitl Maintaining signing secrets is a problem.
18:09 +eleitl They should have used a P2P design.
Do
On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 12:07:39 +
Jacob Appelbaum ja...@appelbaum.net wrote:
Huh. Wow. I just... Excuse me? Who suggests that no Tor developers
haven't already had their arm twisted and stood their ground? Who
suggests that those who run a Tor Directory Authority would comply
with the man
I've had an IRC session with the designer of cjdns (on cjdns)
who made a few interesting points, and suggestions. Comments?
Verbatim chat snip below.
18:03 @cjd if you took the components from cjdns, you could build a TOR like
protocol which used UDP if
possible and made
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 01:50:47PM -0400, Robert Ransom wrote:
18:04 +eleitl I wonder why they didn't choose UDP
Presumably because TCP was easier.
Yep.
18:05 @cjd you need to fall back on tcp in case you're firewalled to hell
18:05 +eleitl Apparently, they're thinking about it
