On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 17:08:38 +
Marek Szuba wrote:
> Anyway, here is my logic. In order to operate properly, my bridge must
> have its ORPort reachable from the Internet.
I might be wrong, but I got impression that if bridge is using
pluggable transports (obfs3, obfs4, meek, snowflake, etc)
Hello,
I run a private obfuscated Tor bridge for myself and some friends. All
in all it has worked fine so far but having recently run some security
scans on the bridge host, I now wonder how resistant to active probing
my bridge is. Apologies if this has already been asked, I have yet to
find a
How about a 'site map' at the bottom. Then one could easily navigate to
their desired page.
On 2019-03-27 5:40 p.m., I wrote:
Thanks. I think that would be better called Guides.
-Original Message-
*From:* pter...@gmail.com
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 22:10, I wrote:
>
On 3/28/19 11:14 AM, Georg Koppen wrote:
> Lars Noodén:
>
> [snip]
>
>> But about the problematic layout that now exists, in general, the CSS
>> media rule mixes all types of screens together regardless of
>> orientation, aspect ratio or size. So mobile and multi-screen desktops
>> all fall
Lars Noodén:
[snip]
> But about the problematic layout that now exists, in general, the CSS
> media rule mixes all types of screens together regardless of
> orientation, aspect ratio or size. So mobile and multi-screen desktops
> all fall under the 'all' or 'screen' values.
Thanks for the
On 3/28/19 12:34 AM, Mirimir wrote:
> On 03/27/2019 09:10 AM, Ralph Seichter wrote:
>> Not sure if this is the right place to vent, but here goes:
>>
>> Whoever changed the Tor website's design seems to a) have a serious
>> vision impairment and b) done his utmost to hide access to the Tor
>>
