On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Griffin Boyce wrote:
>>> - Don't run a hidden service host.
> No. As I clarified previously, I recommend against running a hidden service
> for others to use as you are likely to be legally reasonable for their
> content.
No. As with any clearnet hoster... you
No. As I clarified previously, I recommend against running a hidden service for
others to use as you are likely to be legally reasonable for their content.
On September 17, 2014 6:45:47 AM EST, "Артур Истомин"
wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:26:03AM -0400, Griffin Boyce wrote:
>> Kyle Maxwel
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:26:03AM -0400, Griffin Boyce wrote:
> Kyle Maxwell wrote:
> >Griffin Boyce wrote:
> >>Actually, no, I *am* surprised that they decided to not even
> >>bother trying to gift malware to Mac or Linux users.
> >
> >Probably just playing the odds, I'd suspect. Though they coul
krishna e bera wrote:
>Would it be better to have a separate firewall appliance to ensure the
>hidden service box cannot be as easily DDoS'd or exploited?
No, this can be done very effectively with software firewalls. Though some
people are doing more with authenticated hidden services. Some p
On 09/09/2014 10:26 PM, Griffin Boyce wrote:
> Things that are important to note for hidden service operators:
> - Firewall rules are really useful for keeping out unwarranted scrutiny.
It's also good to have server and tor process in separate machines, or
at least in separate VMs, and to con
On 14-09-10 12:26 AM, Griffin Boyce wrote:
> Things that are important to note for hidden service operators:
> - Firewall rules are really useful for keeping out unwarranted scrutiny.
Would it be better to have a separate firewall appliance to ensure the
hidden service box cannot be as easily DD
> apparently all pedos are windoz-users
Odd. I'd think if anything pedos would "think different".
-V
--
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
Kyle Maxwell wrote:
Griffin Boyce wrote:
Actually, no, I *am* surprised that they decided to not even
bother trying to gift malware to Mac or Linux users.
Probably just playing the odds, I'd suspect. Though they could've
examined the access logs at some point - do we know either way on that?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/08/2014 03:31 AM, Griffin Boyce wrote:
> Mirimir wrote:
>> Also interesting is the fact that Magneto is a _Windows_
>> executable ;)
>
> Unsurprising Facts: Volume 1 ;-)
>
> Actually, no, I *am* surprised that they decided to not even
> both
On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 04:31:30AM -0400, Griffin Boyce wrote:
> Mirimir wrote:
> >Also interesting is the fact that Magneto is a _Windows_ executable ;)
>
> Unsurprising Facts: Volume 1 ;-)
>
> Actually, no, I *am* surprised that they decided to not even bother trying
> to gift malware to M
Mirimir wrote:
Also interesting is the fact that Magneto is a _Windows_ executable ;)
Unsurprising Facts: Volume 1 ;-)
Actually, no, I *am* surprised that they decided to not even bother
trying to gift malware to Mac or Linux users.
--
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.o
On 09/08/2014 02:12 AM, Griffin Boyce wrote:
> Mirimir wrote:
>>
>> It's the same malware.
>>
>> Operation Torpedo _preceded_ the Freedom Hosting takedown.
>>
>> | From the perspective of experts in computer security and privacy,
>> | the NIT is malware, pure and simple. That was demonstrated last
Mirimir wrote:
It's the same malware.
Operation Torpedo _preceded_ the Freedom Hosting takedown.
| From the perspective of experts in computer security and privacy,
| the NIT is malware, pure and simple. That was demonstrated last
| August, when, perhaps buoyed by the success of Operation Torp
On 09/07/2014 01:25 PM, blo...@openmailbox.org wrote:
> On 2014-08-14 00:18, Roger Dingledine wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:06:00AM +, blo...@openmailbox.org wrote:
>>> If it's possible for the owner of a hidden service (whether the FBI
>>> or a regular person) to install malware which g
On 2014-08-14 00:18, Roger Dingledine wrote:
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:06:00AM +, blo...@openmailbox.org wrote:
If it's possible for the owner of a hidden service (whether the FBI
or a regular person) to install malware which grabs visitors' IPs,
then what is stopping any hidden service own
y.
--TZ
Original Message
From: Aymeric Vitte
Apparently from: tor-talk-boun...@lists.torproject.org
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Wired Story on Uncovering Users of Hidden Services.
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 22:11:27 +0200
> Definitely yes, tha
I would love to think that it's not impossible but it seems to be,
whatever documentation exists (which most of Tor users will not read),
it can not predict OS and FF hazards, even if the Tor Browser forbids
everything that is potentially dangerous (and in that case most of the
sites will just
Definitely yes, that's a perfect summary of the situation,
unfortunately, despite of Tor devs efforts, browsing the web is too
dangerous but the Tor browser can provide you a relative anonymity, if
you "don't do stupid stuff" indeed.
Regards,
Le 15/08/2014 01:18, Mirimir a écrit :
On 08/14/2
On 8/14/2014 6:18 PM, Mirimir wrote:
On 08/14/2014 04:48 PM, Aymeric Vitte wrote:
I am "defensive" because you seem to make a general case of something
that can only happen in case of browser's/OS bug, and conveying to Tor
users that they should not use js is a non sense, you make believe them
t
On 08/14/2014 04:48 PM, Aymeric Vitte wrote:
> I am "defensive" because you seem to make a general case of something
> that can only happen in case of browser's/OS bug, and conveying to Tor
> users that they should not use js is a non sense, you make believe them
> that intrinsically js can easily
I am "defensive" because you seem to make a general case of something
that can only happen in case of browser's/OS bug, and conveying to Tor
users that they should not use js is a non sense, you make believe them
that intrinsically js can easily leak their ip and/or mac addresses,
which is wron
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:56 PM, Aymeric Vitte wrote:
>> As
>> someone who argues against using javascript in any context, I can only
>> say "told you so", but that doesn't really help anyone. :)
>
> No and you are wrong
>From
>https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-announce/2013-August/
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:06:00AM +, blo...@openmailbox.org wrote:
> If it's possible for the owner of a hidden service (whether the FBI
> or a regular person) to install malware which grabs visitors' IPs,
> then what is stopping any hidden service owner from doing this?
See
https://lists.tor
On 08/13/2014 03:01 PM, Anders Andersson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:06 PM, wrote:
>> How, in this case, was it possible for the FBI to learn the IP
>> addresses of visitors to this hidden service? The Tor hidden server
>> page states that "In general, the complete connection between
>
Le 13/08/2014 23:01, Anders Andersson a écrit :
Considering the number of individuals that must have visited the hidden
service, this doesn't seem to be very many people. Why were so few
identified? Were the 25 using outdated browsers (TBB)?
How, in this case, was it possible for the FBI to lea
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:06 PM, wrote:
> If it's possible for the owner of a hidden service (whether the FBI or a
> regular person) to install malware which grabs visitors' IPs, then what is
> stopping any hidden service owner from doing this?
Nothing is stopping a hidden service owner from d
26 matches
Mail list logo
