Hi everyone! Tor 0.2.9 stable will be release this month and we want to make a blog post about the Single Onion Service feature. We are wondering if anyone here is running one serving "many users" (for some values of many) and if there is any feedback you can give us or some "quote" that would bring some *zing* to our blog post as an incentive to run one? Thanks! David
On 14 Dec. 2016, at 04:53, David Goulet <dgoulet@ev0ke.net> wrote:
Hi everyone!
Tor 0.2.9 stable will be release this month and we want to make a blog post about the Single Onion Service feature.
We are wondering if anyone here is running one serving "many users" (for some values of many) and if there is any feedback you can give us or some "quote" that would bring some *zing* to our blog post as an incentive to run one?
Propublica is, RiseUp might be, and I've asked the relevant Facebook people. Tim
Begin forwarded message:
From: Mike Tigas <mike@tig.as> Subject: Re: [tor-onions] Testing 0.2.9 (and Single Onion Services) Date: 6 November 2016 at 04:08:57 AEDT To: tor-onions@lists.torproject.org Reply-To: tor-onions@lists.torproject.org
Tim reached out to me about ProPublica's onion service and mentioned the availability of Single Onions in 0.2.9 alpha (coming back to this thread). Here's part of my reply, which we both thought should be shared with the rest of this list:
Been using Single Onions for all our stuff under propub3r6espa33w for about a week or two now (basically since I saw your note for testing in tor-onions). Things are good so far, haven't had any issues with it so far. (And of course, it _is_ much faster feeling.)
Thanks a bunch for all your work on this!
Mike Tigas News Applications Developer, ProPublica https://www.propublica.org/ @mtigas | https://mike.tig.as/ | 0xA993E7156E0E9923
_______________________________________________ tor-onions mailing list tor-onions@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-onions Begin forwarded message:
From: Nima Fatemi <nima@torproject.org> Subject: Re: [tor-onions] Testing 0.2.9 (and Single Onion Services) Date: 10 November 2016 at 09:53:00 AEDT To: tor-onions@lists.torproject.org Reply-To: tor-onions@lists.torproject.org
teor:
Hi,
We recently put out a call for testing Tor 0.2.9, which includes the Single Onion Service feature.
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-October/011541.html
To use this feature, put the following lines in your torrc: HiddenServiceSingleHopMode 1 HiddenServiceNonAnonymousMode 1
I've just asked riseup birds on their irc channel to try this, since their services are also running on non-anonymous onion services.
-- Nima 0X58C4B928A3E218F6 | @mrphs
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" --Evelyn Beatrice Hall
_______________________________________________ tor-onions mailing list tor-onions@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-onions
T -- Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n xmpp: teor at torproject dot org ------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a feature pending in GlobaLeaks for Single Onion Service, but not yet implemented: https://github.com/globaleaks/GlobaLeaks/issues/1801 Once we'll release to new Multi Process architecture, leveraging TxTorCon to handle multiple Tor Process, the Single Onion Service will be in place too. Fabio On 12/13/16 6:53 PM, David Goulet wrote:
Hi everyone!
Tor 0.2.9 stable will be release this month and we want to make a blog post about the Single Onion Service feature.
We are wondering if anyone here is running one serving "many users" (for some values of many) and if there is any feedback you can give us or some "quote" that would bring some *zing* to our blog post as an incentive to run one?
Thanks! David
I understand the desire to advertise the new feature, but - from a communications perspective - understand that running the new Single Onion code requires adoption of a core Tor daemon codebase which isn't even in "stable" yet. Facebook _are_ running Single Onions*, they're just nor running the 2.9 codebase yet, they're doing it the old way. If you want to talk about "sexy sites" it's probably wisest to talk about those who use the feature, including Facebook, and then frame the 2.9 code as reifying/"making concrete" a feature which will aid performance for sites which want onion addresses but do not need to be reticent or anonymous. -a
participants (4)
-
Alec Muffett -
David Goulet -
Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) - lists -
teor