> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Maxim Kammerer <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:37, Robert Ransom <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Which version of wget did you audit? What information leaks did you >>> check for during your audit? Hi,
How can I check what information wget is transmitting? I used wireshark and filtered to see only the traffic sent from wget to localhost:8118 but I'm not a network expert and I don't know how to interpret the data. Anybody has deeper network knowledge? >> >> I should have known I would get useless replies with zero informative >> content to that summary. Wget does not resolve hostnames when it uses >> a proxy. Many programs do (e.g., Midori does, and Pidgin did at one >> point, if I am not mistaken), but wget doesn't. Wget is therefore safe >> to use via Tor. Do you have any specific information saying otherwise, >> besides the obvious no one should ever claim that anything is 100% >> anything, ever? Note that I originally replied to a post by Runa >> Sandvik which was entirely wrong and needed correction, and that you >> are quoting a summary. What is your contribution to this thread >> exactly? > > I'm sorry, but I think you have it backwards in terms of uselessness > of replies on this thread. Ransom asked you a series of cordial, > pointed questions wondering under what configuration you determined > wget does not leak. The underlying point is that it would be neat if > you've done a comprehensive analysis of a specific version of Tor, > etc., etc. > > That would be useful to know. best, Joe > > -- > Joseph Lorenzo Hall > Postdoctoral Research Fellow > Media, Culture and Communication > New York University > https://josephhall.org/ > _______________________________________________ > tor-talk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk > _______________________________________________ tor-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
