[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: Downloading attachments with Tor - is this secure?
- To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Downloading attachments with Tor - is this secure?
- From: Al MailingList <alpal.mailinglist@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:03:55 +0100
- Cc: Matthew <pumpkin@xxxxxxxxx>
- Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:04:10 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=eQkVVgugaotrtKW3onK5PUi1R1JuHziP6CR9akA8gHg=; b=o+P84LjkfXLADIXGUpYUgp+tdvarGuU1K9HWhyXZdxfu1wfsaKTob3dfUR875U+SRS D9735skejObWgiiXulxzpbg1z8mjZP0mXPL8EeLzwcAxReT+3nOOtw3LYHpWC6tWjEYU 2wL05WirZNK6ysj3MyZ38qEjsAi0hxnP5QWvA=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=pGimW5mjYkDsltZrqI1+JPm4GoXsigWWpEUJPvC8EIs43j+jrRvXcSgqT6KGcMwpW0 Q9Y/ldoiOm1tPQUdd3gD1GILwIpsK5OAMhRbjabL0jxElzahwwYYMhgMB8SM/bqVSIGr CY617wywSvGsX3fuEBQ8o5+jSeSCa0jvVsxlM=
- In-reply-to: <201006220944.o5M9iMNZ017146@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <201006220944.o5M9iMNZ017146@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
I really like the Request-Policy plugin too. Quite amazing how many
other sites some reference.
Cheers,
Al
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Scott Bennett <bennett@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 09:10:26 +0100 Matthew <pumpkin@xxxxxxxxx>
> top-posted (*please* stop doing that!):
>>I am not using NoScript but I used it some time ago. The problem I had
>>was that various websites did not work because it turned off JavaScript
>>which seemed essential. At the moment I am using Polipo and Tor with
>>JavaScript operational but Java, Flash, and QuickTime are all turned off
>>in Firefox.
>
> Well, that's rather the point, isn't it? Besides, NoScript has
> always allowed you to whitelist sites that you *trust entirely*. Further,
> you can allow script execution globally, but you'd be utterly foolish to
> do so in a browser not running thoroughly sandboxed.
>>
>>Perhaps you could please tell me why exactly NoScript is superior to the
>>methods I am using?
>>
> Aside from the aforementioned feature of disabling script execution
> by default, it provides many other protections, far too many to go into
> here. Read about them at the NoScript web site at
>
> http://noscript.net
>
> NoScript should be used with Firefox even when tor is not used. NoScript
> should be used with Firefox even when Torbutton is not used, but it is
> much safer to use both NoScript and Torbutton together.
>
>
> Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
> **********************************************************************
> * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu *
> *--------------------------------------------------------------------*
> * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good *
> * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
> * -- a standing army." *
> * -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 *
> **********************************************************************
> ***********************************************************************
> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> unsubscribe or-talk in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
>
***********************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe or-talk in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/