On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:44 AM, David Hill <dh...@mindcry.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:35:00AM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote: >> ja...@icetor.is wrote: >> >> > http://www.coindesk.com/adopt-node-project-aims-bolster-bitcoin-network-security/ >> > >> Assuming that the relevant bitcoin programs could be taught to talk >> SOCKS, then it seems that tor hidden services would, in principle if not >> in performance, be an ideal solution. Running those bitcoin "full" nodes >> as hidden services might well make them less vulnerable to being shut
bitcoind works fine with tor and has some onion full nodes. >> Performance of hidden >> services, however, are severely constrained by the hidden services protocol, >> which can slow connection times enough to make one consider USnail as a >> possible alternative, and the need for circuits of 2n-1 relays, which makes >> access even slower than normal tor circuits of n relays. Performance of hidden services is actually rather good. ymmv. > I am using btcd, an alternative full-node implementation written in > golang. Find it at https://github.com/conformal/btcd. It has built in > proxy support. The wallet, btcwallet, is separate. It also has proxy > support, so that you may connect to btcd over tor or as a tor hidden > service. That can be found at https://github.com/conformal/btcwallet. > > bitcoind nodes are a nice target to look for wallets. But with btcd, I > run that at home while btcwallet runs on my encrypted laptop which > connects to btcd over tor. There is no wallet on my btcd node machine. _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
