Would any relay operators like to have a meetup after the big talk?
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 2:44 PM John Ricketts wrote:
> I will absolutely be there and volunteering!
>
> > On Aug 1, 2024, at 13:20, gus wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > A few Tor people & relay operators will be attending Defcon t
t; > On Jul 27, 2017, at 22:50, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 03:01:48PM -0700, Joel Cretan wrote:
> >> If anyone at DEF CON is interested in meeting up, perhaps we could set
> up a
> >> meeting time, maybe in/around the Crypto and Pr
Hi relay operators,
If anyone at DEF CON is interested in meeting up, perhaps we could set up a
meeting time, maybe in/around the Crypto and Privacy Village. Of course
we're all interested in anonymity, so no pressure to speak up. But if
enough people tell me they're interested, I'll try to organi
Thanks, I've seen this come up before but couldn't find a good recent
answer. That one helps.
The longstanding advice has been to run a relay if you have enough
bandwidth, and a bridge if you only have a tiny bit. It seemed to me that
larger bridges could help people who need them, but maybe this
Hi relay operators,
I've run a number of relays, so I'm familiar with how this usually works
for non-bridges.
I'm working on a project that might want to connect through a bridge, so I
thought I'd fire one of those up to offset the demands I'd be placing on
the network.
I've been operating this
Having run a relay on an older RPi with standard Raspbian, I would caution
you to look carefully at the packages you're using, if you choose that
hardware. Of course the Tor package itself is woefully out of date, so you
have to build from source. But it's worse than that.
I noticed that running r
I observed something similar today. It was basically as you described for
the previous cases you observed, where there was a storm of about 10 times
more TAP handshakes than usual. My middle relay is pretty small, limited to
1.1Mbit/s, and until this point it wasn't even saturating that. Then this
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 4:30 PM, B00ze/Empire wrote:
> Who cares that MS doesn't support it. So you are claiming that because it
> runs on Xp the speed testing is failing? I find that hard to believe.
Everyone using Tor cares. I believe the other posters are seizing on this
detail because it is
istic circuit
> construction (though seems it should since they're then unusable).
>
> Cheers! -Damian
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Joel Cretan wrote:
> > I'm running a relay that I do not intend to use for anything else, so I
> set
> > S
I'm running a relay that I do not intend to use for anything else, so I set
SocksPort to 0. I usually have two or three circuits established anyway,
though, so I guess I haven't managed to disable creating those. I'm not
sure what they are for. They are always labeled "Purpose:
Ags=is_internal,need
10 matches
Mail list logo
