Thus spake Leo Unglaub (leo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx): > On 2013-02-21 19:49, Mike Perry wrote: > > This is actually a pretty deep problem with many pieces. It might > > not be fixed automatically so long as the OS considers the Tor > > Controller a separate app. > > i have to stop here. I made an mistake in my previous E-Mail. I don't > plan to launch or integrate the TBB into the control tool. I thought > TBB was something else. > > I dont' want to support the browser or any other applications. My tool > is simply a control tool for the running tor instance. (the local one > or additional servers via an SSH connection). > > But i am just working on a control tool, not a launcher for the secure > browser or something like that. This sounds great. Sounds like it can be exactly what I had in mind: An optional Tor Controller that can let you do nifty advanced stuff if you want, but otherwise won't get in the way or confuse people. The next release of TBB will have a Control Port on 9151. We still use randomly-generated password authentication though, which might make testing difficult for now. When we move to the browser-based controller, we'll hopefully also move to "AUTHCHALLENGE"/"SAFECOOKIE" authentication so that it is possible for the user to run alternate controller programs without configuration. It looks like stem supports automatic authentication negotiation with a single API call, which will come in very handy for you for this purpose: https://stem.torproject.org/api/connection.html#stem.connection.authenticate -- Mike Perry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev