I'm involved in a project that will ultimately run a website as a
hidden service. Because of the content if the site (not child porn or
gambling) we're concerned about how easy a Tor connected server is to
find. Also, are there best practices to securely hosting a server on
Tor?
Thank,
A
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 01:12:47AM -0600, Anthony Papillion wrote:
> I'm involved in a project that will ultimately run a website as a
> hidden service. Because of the content if the site (not child porn
> or gambling) we're concerned about how easy a Tor connected server
> is to find.
Hidden ser
At 04:53 AM 3/6/2013 -0500, you wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 01:12:47AM -0600, Anthony Papillion wrote:
>> I'm involved in a project that will ultimately run a website as a
>> hidden service. Because of the content if the site (not child porn
>> or gambling) we're concerned about how easy a Tor
"That said, there are plenty of hidden services out there, and few
stories of people breaking their anonymity by breaking Tor. So they're
not foolproof for sure, but they're also not trivial to deanonymize. "
Could you elaborate on this? I have not found a story where "tor" was
broken to fi
Juan Garofalo wrote:
> Roger wrote:
>
> >Hidden services are definitely weaker than regular Tor circuits, a)
> >because the adversary can induce them to speak,
>
> Care to elaborate on that? You mean timing attacks (based on the
> fact that hidden servers 'speak' to clients?) ? Or the own
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/03/13 20:00, Griffin Boyce wrote:
>>> Hidden services are definitely weaker than regular Tor
>>> circuits, a) because the adversary can induce them to speak,
>> Care to elaborate on that? You mean timing attacks (based on the
>> fact that hid
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 03:46:51PM -0300, Juan Garofalo wrote:
> >Hidden services are definitely weaker than regular Tor circuits, a)
> >because the adversary can induce them to speak,
>
> Care to elaborate on that? You mean timing attacks (based on the fact
>that hidden servers 'speak' to clients
>> Because of the content if the site (not child porn or gambling)
>
> Hidden services are definitely weaker than regular Tor circuits, a)
> because the adversary can induce them to speak, and b) because they stay
> at the same place over time. Mostly 'a'.
>
> That said, there are plenty of hidden
Hello,
I've been using Tor for many years now (when Tor was hosted by EFF), and
I love how fast and far Tor is progressing, as well as other Tor Project
projects (e.g., TorBrowser and TorButton). I've always wondered what it
would take for Tor to be called v1.0, e.g., how different would that Tor
On Wed, 6 Mar 2013 04:53:05 -0500, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> Hidden services are definitely weaker than regular Tor circuits,
> a) because the adversary can induce them to speak, and b)
> because they stay at the same place over time. Mostly 'a'.
On Wed, 6 Mar 2013 17:13:23 -0500, Roger Dingledin
At 05:13 PM 3/6/2013 -0500, you wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 03:46:51PM -0300, Juan Garofalo wrote:
>> >Hidden services are definitely weaker than regular Tor circuits, a)
>> >because the adversary can induce them to speak,
>>
>> Care to elaborate on that? You mean timing attacks (based on the
11 matches
Mail list logo
