On 25 Feb 2016, at 16:10, Ann O'Nymous ann.onymous@vfemail.net wrote:
We discussed requiring a separate build for Single Onion Services, and initially rejected it in favour of a long option name containing "NonAnonymous".
Why did you reject separate builds? The use case for Single-Onion Services is very different from traditional Double-Onion Services. And potential consequences for accidentally using Single-Onion Services are huge. Accidents happen. Stupidity happens. Perhaps someone is learning and testing, and then goes to production with the wrong torrc. Or they hire someone to code, and there is miscommunication. I agree with Fabio. Requiring a custom build with a --very-hard-to-ignore-warning flag is far stronger protection.
We initially decided it wasn't necessary. But now it seems like a good way to address Nick's concerns. I'll talk to him about it when I see him over the next few days.
Tim
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)
teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP 968F094B
teor at blah dot im OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F