Re: [tor-talk] [tor-dev] Freenet + Onioncat: Is the traffic welcome?

On 6/23/16, grarpamp wrote: > Don't forget to add around 1000+ ms latency. Should say that on average tor's not that high, but as to prudently setting somewhat higher timeouts, especially for initial setup where the '+' may indeed apply. -- tor-talk mailing list -

Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer

On 6/24/2016 4:26 PM, I wrote: " foreign law" QED Yes - most lands & their laws, other than the one a person grew up in or resides in are "foreign" to them. It's not a slur. :D -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to

Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer

" foreign law " QED -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer

>> > You can post news about your country. Certainly, but should I presume sees the world from that perspective? -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

[tor-talk] The FBI Is Classifying Its Tor Browser Exploit Because 'National Security'

https://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-fbi-is-classifying-its-tor-browser-exploit Maybe it is time for the Tor project to stop promoting the obviously insecure TBB, and embrace something that is known to be more secure, like Whonix? John Pinkman -- tor-talk mailing list -

[tor-talk] ​Tor Is Teaming Up With Researchers To Protect Users From FBI Hacking

Found this on Motherboard https://motherboard.vice.com/read/tor-is-teaming-up-with-researchers-to-protect-users-from-fbi-hacking > ​Tor Is Teaming Up With Researchers To Protect Users From FBI Hacking > Written by > Joshua Kopstein > Contributor > > June 19, 2016 // 03:28 PM EST > > The FBI

Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer

On 24.06.16 16:08, I wrote: Is this list for all Tor people or just USA? Subject: Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer You can post news about your country. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change

Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer

On 6/24/2016 8:08 AM, I wrote: Is this list for all Tor people or just USA? Subject: Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer Is that a serious or satirical question? It's always been for people of all countries, as far as I remember. If

Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer

Seems that saying "the decision is bad news for privacy" is an historical understatement. It's more like burning the Constitution & shooting the ashes out of the solar system. "We don't need no stinking warrant." I have doubts that sending scolding emails or petitions will in any way change

Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 2:19 AM, grarpamp wrote: > https://www.eff.org/files/2016/06/23/matish_suppression_edva.pdf > > The judge's logic is pretty

Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer

Is this list for all Tor people or just USA? > Subject: Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not > Protect Your Home Computer -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to

Re: [tor-talk] Reminder to stay on-topic

On 24.06.16 06:37, Griffin Boyce wrote: I've been fairly surprised that the response has been almost entirely positive. The 45-post thread on cypherpunks where Zenaan Harkness called me a "fake man" (classy) notwithstanding. And is Zenaan banned? No. Is grarpamp or most of the other

Re: [tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer

On 24.06.16 09:19, grarpamp wrote: The EFF reports that a federal court in Virginia today ruled that a criminal defendant has no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in his personal computer (PDF), located inside his home. The court says the federal government does not need a warrant to hack into

Re: [tor-talk] Reminder to stay on-topic

Let's move on from this finally. It's starting to get annoying. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

[tor-talk] US Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/06/federal-court-fourth-amendment-does-not-protect-your-home-computer https://www.eff.org/files/2016/06/23/matish_suppression_edva.pdf https://yro.slashdot.org/story/16/06/23/2040255/federal-court-the-fourth-amendment-does-not-protect-your-home-computer The EFF