> On 19 Jan 2017, at 13:46, Geoff Down wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 02:33 AM, teor wrote:
>>
>>> On 19 Jan 2017, at 13:30, Geoff Down wrote:
>
>>> Then a HUP produced the same sequence (but a different PID), with no
>>> sign of the lines you mention above regarding 'restart'.
>>> The o
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 02:33 AM, teor wrote:
>
> > On 19 Jan 2017, at 13:30, Geoff Down wrote:
> > Then a HUP produced the same sequence (but a different PID), with no
> > sign of the lines you mention above regarding 'restart'.
> > The original obsfproxy process 17356 is still in the same sta
> On 19 Jan 2017, at 13:30, Geoff Down wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 01:14 AM, teor wrote:
>>
>>> On 19 Jan 2017, at 12:00, Geoff Down wrote:
>>> Jan 19 00:47:42.000 [notice] Tor 0.2.9.8 opening log file.
>>> Jan 19 00:47:55.000 [warn] Server managed proxy encountered a method
>>> err
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 01:14 AM, teor wrote:
>
> > On 19 Jan 2017, at 12:00, Geoff Down wrote:
> > Jan 19 00:47:42.000 [notice] Tor 0.2.9.8 opening log file.
> > Jan 19 00:47:55.000 [warn] Server managed proxy encountered a method
> > error. (obfs3 Could not set up listener (0.0.0.0:x) for
> On 19 Jan 2017, at 12:00, Geoff Down wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I sent a SIGHUP to the tor process after altering the torrc and got this
> effect:
> Jan 19 00:47:42.000 [notice] Tor 0.2.9.8 opening log file.
> Jan 19 00:47:55.000 [warn] Server managed proxy encountered a method
> error. (obfs3 Could not
Hi,
I sent a SIGHUP to the tor process after altering the torrc and got this
effect:
Jan 19 00:47:42.000 [notice] Tor 0.2.9.8 opening log file.
Jan 19 00:47:55.000 [warn] Server managed proxy encountered a method
error. (obfs3 Could not set up listener (0.0.0.0:x) for 'obfs3'
(Address already i
Dear bad-relays,
Would you consider banning the following Exits / Guards?
They have an incorrect ContactInfo, which uses the domain of a
legitimate relay operator, torworld.org. This may be an attempt to
evade automated sybil analysis, as may their variant ContactInfos.
They also don't have MyFa
On 01/17/2017 12:00 AM, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:49:46PM -0700, Mirimir wrote:
>> Or you need adequate anonymity, and be willing to lose sunk cost.
>
> I think trying to run exit relays with anonymity, and with plans to
> discard them as needed, is a poor plan long-te
I recently got this answer from "torworld.org" -see below.
They told me that a relay
https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/3D512D9ACD9A6056ED6EA20C46406FA5A6788321
with contact "e @torworld" is not operated by them.
As nusenu showed at the end of the message some days ago somebody with a
simil
Hey,
Sorry to disturb about that... I'm trying to find a way to update/add
informations on this page :
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/GoodBadISPs
I have mailed a vps provider about running Tor relays on their DC, and
there's no problem about running it.
About exit node, it can
> On 18 Jan 2017, at 09:14, Steve Snyder wrote:
>
> Note that a bridge is not guaranteed to be used. I've seen plenty of bridges,
> both plain-vanilla and obfs4, with or without IPv6, regardless of geography,
> that use only a few megabytes of bandwidth per month. Everything seems good
> in t
> On 18 Jan 2017, at 04:24, Alan wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Dec 2016, at 09:59 PM, Alan wrote:
>>> # Some problem with dns resulting in [WARN] eventdns: All nameservers
>>> have failed - i've switched the dns to 8.8.8.8, only seen that error
>>> once
>>> since
>>
>> Please don't use Google's DNS s
12 matches
Mail list logo