[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-bugs] #29347 [Obfuscation/meek]: Rewrite meek-http-helper as a WebExtension
#29347: Rewrite meek-http-helper as a WebExtension
------------------------------+------------------------------
Reporter: dcf | Owner: dcf
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: Medium | Milestone:
Component: Obfuscation/meek | Version:
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: webextension | Actual Points:
Parent ID: | Points:
Reviewer: | Sponsor:
------------------------------+------------------------------
Comment (by yawning):
Replying to [comment:16 gk]:
> Yes, those are good points. However, I'd like to understand what you
think we should do for Tor Browser here. In particular, I was wondering
whether to spend time on reviewing and testing your changes in a Tor
Browser context *now*, with the aim to have all of that merged to the
alpha series (so it will eventually be in stable at some point), given the
current plan outlined in #29430.
For my reference when should I have a new tag of utls and obfs4proxy by?
There's a number of fixes I feel are required in the former, but my free
time over the next few weeks will be even tighter than it usually is.
> I mean testing a transport based on ESNI in an alpha (which needs an
extension) should not be a problem once that is ready and we could easily
review the extension and tor-browser-build integration then.
Adding ESNI to utls is likely fairly straight forward if that's the sort
of thing people care about.
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/29347#comment:17>
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