[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-bugs] #18037 [Tor]: Should the user be allowed to specify FQDNs for HS TARGETs?
#18037: Should the user be allowed to specify FQDNs for HS TARGETs?
------------------------+----------------------------------
Reporter: yawning | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: Low | Milestone: Tor: 0.2.???
Component: Tor | Version: Tor: unspecified
Severity: Minor | Resolution:
Keywords: tor-hs dns | Actual Points:
Parent ID: | Points:
Sponsor: |
------------------------+----------------------------------
Comment (by alecmuffett):
I use all three forms of HSDir specification in torrc at different times,
including for work.
1) port number - because lazy
2) IP address - because marginally less lazy and willing to type in
127.0.0.1 for localhost in reasonable certainty that it won't change
3) FQDN - because the loadbalancer VIP changes IP address from datacentre
to datacentre and the FQDN is a safe way to record it
Given the recent controversy about Apache's special treatment of requests
coming in from "localhost", I actually wonder if there ought to be a
_fourth_ syntax, vaguely IPv6 inspired, along the lines of:
HiddenServicePort interface:eth0 80
...which queries the named network interface and asks what IP address it
is currently bound to, directing requests to _that_ rather than
"localhost"
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18037#comment:8>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs