On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 17:08:17 +0100 bancfc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > TBB sandboxing is a great hardening measure. I was wondering if there > are side-effects such as breaking setups that involve using anonymous > networks other than Tor. Such as: > https://thetinhat.com/tutorials/darknets/i2p-browser-setup-guide.html Well, i2p doesn't expose a tor control port, so that would break, yes. > As a workaround we can document how to toggle the TBB variable to > disable this. Of course the best solution is having the isolation > compatible with alternative setups if you consider this (minority) > use-case worthy of your effort. It's not a TBB variable. All of this stuff will be opt-in for the near/medium future anyway (eg: under Linux, the sandboxing component will be a separate download). The initial release will not have support for things like this at all. So the answer is, don't use the Linux sandboxing stuff until this sort of thing is supported, if you have a really exotic config that you want to have work[0]. Regards, -- Yawning Angel [0]: The version number is going to be "0.0.1", and as of now I'm far more concerned with getting the common use cases fully supported.
Attachment:
pgpEzcmTuoXN8.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev