Perhaps a more constructive approach is to help define what the golden
standard for a true tor router should be at
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/Torouter. There are a
bunch of open tickets and design questions which need thought, research,
and solutions.
If someone wants to ta
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
> I reported this bug some weeks ago but I haven't received any answer:
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/13256
>
> I'm bringing it here to discuss it and know your thoughts.
it's been advised for some time now not to use the default
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello!
I reported this bug some weeks ago but I haven't received any answer:
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/13256
I'm bringing it here to discuss it and know your thoughts.
Regards,
Pablo.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 10/15/2014 07:57 AM, Tom Ritter wrote:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/2j9caq/anonabox_tor_router_box_is_false_representation
This
>
is what lead me to pull my financial support for this:
https://twitter.com/justinsteven/status/522
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 01:33:43PM -0800, I wrote:
> and if they were really into TOR why aren't they discussing it on this list?
because they're like two guys who threw up a under-$10k kickstarter and
had it completely explode under their feet, I suspect.
Succeeding far beyond your dreams at cro
and if they were really into TOR why aren't they discussing it on this list?
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
I was excited about this project and signed up as a backer. Then I read
http://www.reddit.com/r/anonabox/comments/2ja22g/hi_im_august_germar_a_developer_for_the_anonabox/
and have reduced my contribution amount. Yes, I really like the idea of it
this small device and what it does but at the same
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I understand the approach of this, but it again reverts back to the
problem of people believing a product will provide them reasonable
protection without the responsibility of having to take measures
themselves. There are stories everyday in the newspa
I'm far from being knowledgeable about this project, but since no one
else has, I'll point out some controversy around it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/2j9caq/anonabox_tor_router_box_is_false_representation
-tom
___
tor-relays mailing list
t
On 10/15/2014 08:00 AM, Thomas White wrote:
> I am personally hoping somebody high up in the Tor Project management
> will openly condemn this atrocity and hopefully Kickstarter and the
> funders will withdraw their funds before a whole load of people buy
> into this "security as a tool" idea.
I'm
Sven Reissmann transcribed 2.4K bytes:
> Hi there,
>
> I recently read about the anonbox project [1], a small hardware-router,
> which allows end-users to connect their whole LAN to the Tor network.
> The project is on kickstarter at the moment [2].
>
> Has there already been a discussion on how
I have seen their website and it looks like someone is trying to sell this
product though I didn't see a price tag yet.
Looks dangerous. Possibly a honeypot.
Thanks,
Torzilla11
Sent from my Sony Xperia™ smartphone
Thomas White wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Well th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Well the topic has come up several times in the last day or two on IRC
and generally the feeling is that it may be quite bad for the users of
the product, not necessarily the Tor network however.
One thing that AnonBox does do is increase Tor network
Hi there,
I recently read about the anonbox project [1], a small hardware-router,
which allows end-users to connect their whole LAN to the Tor network.
The project is on kickstarter at the moment [2].
Has there already been a discussion on how this might affect the
performance of the Tor network?
14 matches
Mail list logo
