On 24.04.24 19:31, tor-home at encryptfirst.com wrote:
Maybe not directly related, but I've seen the same. The webtunnel
bridge shows as functional on the bridges website and offline on the
metrics website. It's been that way since I started running a
webtunnel bridge last year.
Could it be
://community.torproject.org/relay/community-resources/good-bad-isps/
Bauruine
On 22.04.24 03:02, Landon wrote:
Hello,
I am currently using gcore.com <http://gcore.com> as my VPS hosting
provider. I have been running a Tor bridge with them for several years
now. I am supposed to be getting 200 Mbps unm
AccountingRule to not go over the 3TB limit. "man tor" has a detailed
descriptions for the possible options.
Bauruine
[0] https://support.torproject.org/relay-operators/limit-total-bandwidth/
On 31.03.23 21:34, sysmanager7 via tor-relays wrote:
Greetings all!
Setting up a new Digital Ocean
Hi
I've hacked together a little script [0] for those of us with many
relays that don't want to wait till issue #17 / #55 are resolved. [1]
Bauruine
[0] https://gist.github.com/bauruine/6f333720b50ba6747970a5e6e4b97cb4
[1]
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/network-health/tor-weather
From what I read it looks like they plan to create some blockchain that
uses "Proof-of-relaying-Tor-traffic" as an alternative to Proof of Work
or Proof of Stake. From their blog "rather than requiring complex
off-chain verification or arbitrary computation to prevent bad actors
receiving
Hi Andreas
According to [0] QAT supports:
* RSA with 2048, 3072, and 4096 bit keys
* ECDH for the Montgomery Curve X25519 and NIST Prime Curves P-256 and
P-384
* ECDSA for the NIST Prime Curves P-256 and P-384
* AES-GCM with 128, 192, and 256 bit keys
The tor-spec [1] shows that Tor
It's about https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ a letter that not only
calls for the cancellation of RMS but also "We are calling for the
removal of the entire Board of the Free Software Foundation." and
"Refuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and RMS." that is
supported by a lot of
