Hi,
intrigeri <[email protected]> wrote:
> sajolida wrote (11 Feb 2015 15:12:02 GMT) :
> > $ python tormonitor.py
> > [Errno 13] Permission denied
> > Traceback (most recent call last):
> > File "tormonitor.py", line 346, in <module>
> > app = TorMonitorApplication()
> > File "tormonitor.py", line 316, in __init__
> > message_format=_("Unable to connect to Tor daemon."))
>
> Seems that there's a bug in this code path.
>
I don't think that there is a bug in this code path. You need Gtk >=
3.14 (basically Jessie). Please clone the repository again as I messed
up the initial commit.
> And/or maybe you're hitting this bug because you're running the code
> as the `amnesia' user, who cannot talk to the Tor control port. Try as
> the vidalia user?
>
The user running tormonitor must have access to Tor control socket
*and* to Tor SOCKS port. In Tails/Jessie:
sudo iptables -I OUTPUT 1 -p tcp --dport 9050 -d 127.0.0.1 -m owner
\ --uid-owner vidalia -j ACCEPT
sudo -u vidalia tormonitor
> >> Do we miss something else to replace Vidalia ?
>
[...]
> > - Info about relays in the circuits.
>
> Would be useful, but not a blocker IMO, since that's an advanced
> feature and is already provided by arm.
>
Tor Monitor provides this info.
> > - Ability to close a circuit manually.
>
> No idea what are the use case for this feature that we would want to
> support. If someone really wants it, better add it to arm IMO.
>
Tor Monitor doesn't provide this feature yet. It would be very easy to
add, even though I'm not sure I find it desirable: currently we only
*monitor* Tor. Do we also really want to *control* it?
> > - Ability to view logs from Tor without an
> > administration password.
>
> Not sure what action one can easily take based on the info found in
> these logs, without an administration password. I say we can forget
> that one too. If someone really wants it, better add it to arm IMO.
>
That would be quite easy to add it there is a consensus that it is
useful.
> > - New identity (the one we have in Tor Browser does something
> > different).
>
> We had plans (#5716) to hide this Vidalia feature, so I don't think we
> should add it to this new GUI. This feature is available in arm
> already anyway, for advanced users who know what they're doing, and
> for people who insist on shooting themselves in the foot.
>
Easy to add, even though I'm not convinced for the same reason as
"Close circuit"
> > - Bandwidth Graph.
>
> Advanced feature IMO, already present in arm. If we care much about
> getting this info graphically, then I think some GNOME system monitor
> would be a better tool to satisfy the need (it would be a suitable
> replacement in the context of Tails, since we're routing almost
> everything through Tor).
>
It would be possible (and I think desirable) to add a bandwidth graph to
Tor Monitor and I already thought about it. But I don't know how to
implement that in Gtk yet, and I'd better see this as a fun item than
as a required feature. Patches are welcome though, and if there is a
consensus that it is required I'll do it.
> > Which one of those are you covering already or did you consider?
>
> IMO we should focus on the basic features we would strongly miss if we
> drop Vidalia, and leave anything more advanced to arm. This way, we
> keep our maintenance workload to the bare minimum, and provide
> a simpler GUI.
>
I agree on that. Currently Tor Monitor provides circuit and associated
streams, and infos on relays in a circuit. We could add the logs easily
and the bandwidth graph less easily to provide a nice monitor. I'm not
sure that the other features are desirable.
Cheers
_______________________________________________
Tails-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev
To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to
[email protected].
