David Fifield: > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 11:00:37PM -0500, Matt Traudt wrote: >> I've expressed interest in the past about running default obfs4 bridges >> and am still willing to do so. >> >> I'd like to hold off actually setting them up till its close to the time >> that Tor Browser will integrate them. I hear it's better for the default >> bridges to not advertise and I'd rather they didn't sit paid for but >> idle for too long. >> >> You can find me on IRC as pastly. > > Matt says he can get some new bridges running quickly--say, in time for > the next release of Tor Browser. Since Matt also runs exit relays [1], would it make sense to add a logic to torbrowser that *IFF* the user choose to use default bridges these exits get excluded in that torbrowser's tor instance? That would also be a possible workaround for isis's ticket about noisebridge bridges? [2] [1] https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/335746A6DEB684FABDF3FC5835C3898F05C5A5A8 https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/09FA8B4F665AD65D2C2A49870F1AA3BA8811E449 https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/95880E08A375C62D570B885554CCCFBCCB362660 [2] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/21864 > NoiseTor would like to run high-capacity > default bridges for Tor Browser, but they are nervous about simultaneously > running exits without being able to direct people not to use both. -- https://mastodon.social/@nusenu https://twitter.com/nusenu_
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ tor-project mailing list tor-project@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-project