[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: Torbutton 1.3.0-alpha: Community Edition!
- To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Torbutton 1.3.0-alpha: Community Edition!
- From: David Bennett <dbennett455@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 14:59:42 -0500
- Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 15:59:55 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fcVT3RwjnZuSh56QS1LZA1dFgLwBHdVtEFBuLGzu028=; b=hegbNZhJ1plbn2V8zwwa81uQZN38LtPzsIERfQxXaUxh7e+KaR6L1iRVM0QkfNumjy sWEzQRFZa97uWLw1PVmV845zDWhc+mu9oAyAzJX85MuzXIyEZ6ZJIoEVdbtrs2IVgS/O tY+uj6VS4W76ROi1lw9BHMi/xCar+NAcHGXTc=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=Awwjx7MjpEJBzXFKp+OVT6J3hqEG4nYAx36eW02Tv7j/NvPck0I8JKyrOL/kaXpWa9 Ps43JULWdJ5e+yl7jCQZLXyQraQ6JXfp5H7snZFGcajYIYLvg/34KYUm+LXnjNx4uMk9 JHJtmqBt6w5djQ3e/GLjdfwS8CTotJTJ+B/VM=
- In-reply-to: <20101002015107.GD13960@xxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <20100930225748.GC13960@xxxxxxxxxx> <20101001013645.GA15005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4CA61B33.9020900@xxxxxxxxx> <20101002015107.GD13960@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.12) Gecko/20100907 Fedora/3.0.7-1.fc12 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.0.7
On 10/01/2010 08:51 PM, Mike Perry wrote:
> Intuition also tells me that tor:// and tors:// urls will be easier to
> use, understand, and remember by the general public.. Can you give
> some examples/reasons why just using these schemes actually prevents
> us from doing this scheme layering idea for other protocols in the
> future (when it is supported)? In otherwords, why can't we just do both?
>
>
There is no reason why not. As long as there are no obvious risks with
a user clicking on a public tor:// URL and initiating the proxy layer.
My understanding of the implementation is that all traffic occurring in
the host browser after a tor:// request is initiated would be re-routed
unless the 'tor' schema handler launched a separate host browser. This
may not be the intention of the user and may conflict with accessing IP
whitelisted services (FTP hosts, etc...)
I haven't tried the new version yet, is there a descriptive popup that
explains what's happening when a user clicks a tor:// or tors:// ?
--Dave
***********************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe or-talk in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/