Thanks all for your replies… this helps. Makes sense why the non-hashed fingerprint isn’t shown. 

Glad to know I was just misunderstanding the info on Globe/Atlas. I was worried there was something wrong with my node.

-Pat



On Jan 19, 2015, at 1:39 AM, Karsten Loesing <karsten@torproject.org> wrote:

Signed PGP part
On 18/01/15 19:02, Patrick Scharmer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’ve been running a bridge for over a year and noticed recently
> that the fingerprint shown in ARM (and that actually works when
> connecting to the bridge) differs from the fingerprint displayed
> for my bridge on both Atlas and Globe. Any thoughts on why this
> would happen and how to fix it? I’m assuming the fingerprint
> published on Atlas & Globe is the same fingerprint that will be
> distributed by bridges.torproject, is that correct?

arm displays your bridge's fingerprint, which is also distributed by
bridges.torproject.org.

Atlas and Globe show your bridge's *hashed* fingerprint.  The reason
that they're not showing the (non-hashed) fingerprint is that anyone
could ask the bridge authority for your bridge's current descriptor if
they had its (non-hashed) fingerprint, and that would reveal your
bridge's IP address.  That's why Atlas and Globe hash your fingerprint.

> Apologies if this is a common question… I’ve only recently joined
> the mailing list and couldn’t find a way to search the archives
> other than browsing.

It's a valid question.  If you have any ideas how to explain it better
on Atlas or Globe, please open a ticket.  Thanks!

All the best,
Karsten

_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays