>That means that you Wii is talking to Tor, while it should talk to polipo.
>Polipo has to listen on your local lan on some Windows or Linux machine.
>It must not only listen on 127.0.0.1, but also on the internal LAN IP.
Is it sufficient to have Polipo listen for the Wii's IP, or should I have
i
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 00:19:33 -0600
Mason Mack wrote:
> Then I told my Wii to use a proxy with the address 66.66.66.66 on port
> 8118, and to use the proxy for HTTPS connections. The Wii was
> unable to connect to the internet. I tried accessing
> http://www.google.com and http://check.torproject
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 12:19:33AM -0600, Mason Mack wrote:
(snip)
> proxyAddress = "66.66.66.66" ###Best I could come up with
The problem appears to be here.
(snip)
> allowedClients = "127.0.0.1, 192.168.0.0/24" ###Not sure if I was supposed
> to change this one
You didn't need to change it..
Hi,
as far I know, it has never been stated like this. Reasons:
1. critical ipv6 bug:
https://code.google.com/p/torsocks/issues/detail?id=37
No progress on it for almost one year.
There is a workaround:
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/torsocks#WorkaroundforIPv6leakbug
But I g
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:02 PM, adrelanos wrote:
> Hi,
> [
[...]
> What are the consequences?
>
Probably somebody should fork it?
--
Nick
___
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 13:09 -0400, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:02 PM, adrelanos wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > [
>
>
> [...]
>
> > What are the consequences?
> >
>
> Probably somebody should fork it?
>
I consider myself someone moderately familiar with the Tor culture.
However,
Nick Mathewson:
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:02 PM, adrelanos wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> [
>
>
> [...]
>
>> What are the consequences?
>>
>
> Probably somebody should fork it?
>
Could you blog it please?
___
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@lists.torproject.o
Ted Smith:
> On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 13:09 -0400, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:02 PM, adrelanos wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> [
>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> What are the consequences?
>>>
>>
>> Probably somebody should fork it?
>>
>
> I consider myself someone moderately familiar with the Tor
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:34 PM, adrelanos wrote:
>
>
> Could you blog it please?
I'd like to see more discussion from more people here first, and see
whether somebody steps up to say, "Yeah, I can maintain that" here, or
whether somebody else who knows more than me about the issues has something
Most everyone's read the advice about not using extra addons / plugins
in TBB, due to possible anonymity leaks. I understand.
TBB is already slow, which is understandable. Using "stock" TBB that
allows ads & possibly other items increasing bandwidth is far slower on
many sites - even news site
> I'd like to see more discussion from more people here first, and see
> whether somebody steps up to say, "Yeah, I can maintain that" here, or
> whether somebody else who knows more than me about the issues has something
> to say. Otherwise I don't know whether to write a "looking for maintainer"
grarpamp:
>> I'd like to see more discussion from more people here first, and see
>> whether somebody steps up to say, "Yeah, I can maintain that" here, or
>> whether somebody else who knows more than me about the issues has something
>> to say. Otherwise I don't know whether to write a "looking f
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 19:49 +, adrelanos wrote:
> grarpamp:
> >> I'd like to see more discussion from more people here first, and see
> >> whether somebody steps up to say, "Yeah, I can maintain that" here, or
> >> whether somebody else who knows more than me about the issues has something
> >>
>> I don't agree. torsocks is still useful to prevent identity correlation
>> through circuit sharing. Pushing all traffic through Trans- and DnsPort
>> is not the answer.
>
> Also, I don't want all of my applications using Tor -- just some of
> them. Using Tails or TransPort wouldn't allow me to d
> Read up on the "Tor2webMode" option.
Tor2webMode 0|1
When this option is set, Tor connects to hidden services
non-anonymously. This option also disables client connections to
non-hidden-service hostnames through Tor. It must only be used when
ru
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 18:12 -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> >> I don't agree. torsocks is still useful to prevent identity correlation
> >> through circuit sharing. Pushing all traffic through Trans- and DnsPort
> >> is not the answer.
> >
> > Also, I don't want all of my applications using Tor -- just so
--
For contact and information call me:
Customer number: +44 845 154 1295
24/24 h , 7/7
agent number 257992.
Best regards
Alessandro A.
___
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
On 11/2/12 11:26 PM, grarpamp wrote:
>> Read up on the "Tor2webMode" option.
>Tor2webMode 0|1
>When this option is set, Tor connects to hidden services
>non-anonymously. This option also disables client connections to
>non-hidden-service hostnames through
Nick Mathewson:
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:34 PM, adrelanos wrote:
>>
>>
>> Could you blog it please?
>
>
> I'd like to see more discussion from more people here first, and see
> whether somebody steps up to say, "Yeah, I can maintain that" here, or
> whether somebody else who knows more than me
>>Tor2webMode 0|1
>>When this option is set, Tor connects to hidden services
>>non-anonymously. This option also disables client connections to
>>non-hidden-service hostnames through Tor. It must only be used
>> when
>>running a tor2web Hidde
On 11/02/2012 07:36 PM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
> Nick Mathewson:
>> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:34 PM, adrelanos wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Could you blog it please?
>>
>>
>> I'd like to see more discussion from more people here first, and see
>> whether somebody steps up to say, "Yeah, I can maintain that"
Sometimes we see node providers / nodes for hire,
announcements of verious projects on here. But I
think rarely full commercial so far.
Would people mind seeing marked announcements
for free, non-profit or commercial [any level of] services that
could be useful to anonymous peoples? I can
think of
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 13:06:50 -0500
Joe Btfsplk wrote:
> Most everyone's read the advice about not using extra addons / plugins
> in TBB, due to possible anonymity leaks. I understand.
> TBB is already slow, which is understandable. Using "stock" TBB that
> allows ads & possibly other items in
>The upshot is, the machine running the proxy probably has a 192.168.0.x
>address. That is the address you need to use for the proxyAddress.
-_- It works now.
>Oh, wow. Where to begin? You can't just pluck an IP address out of the
ether and expect everything to just work.
It turns out I was mi
24 matches
Mail list logo
