<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
I recently experimented with Tor in China. My friend over there could not get to a download of it from his location (Guangzhou). I had to send it to him. When he tried to use it. He was unable to connect to the Tor Network? Not sure why?<BR>
<BR><BR>Joseph Wennechuk<BR>________________<BR><BR><BR><BR> <BR>
> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 18:54:24 -0500<BR>> From: unsolicited@swiz.ca<BR>> To: kwlug-disc@kwlug.org<BR>> Subject: Re: [kwlug-disc] netalyzr/ispgeeks interpreting [was: Re: Reliable Broadband speed test]<BR>> <BR>> Kyle Spaans wrote, On 03/07/2011 5:50 PM:<BR>> > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Cedric Puddy <cedric@thinkers.org> wrote:<BR>> >> Yeah, agreed, TOR end nodes are best set up on dedicated IP<BR>> >> addresses that do not share with other non-TOR traffic.<BR>> > <BR>> > You can run a non-exit TOR node can't you? It's not as great, because<BR>> > you're not allowing people to hop out of the TOR network, but you can<BR>> > still act as a cog in the machine and contribute a set amount of<BR>> > bandwidth.<BR>> > <BR>> > P.S. Apparently the NSA runs a healthy number of TOR exit nodes. Why?<BR>> > Because most people are silly enough to run unencrypted traffic<BR>> > through TOR. (I.E. If you connect to a server via telnet, but through<BR>> > TOR, you're still going to get owned.)<BR>> <BR>> <sigh><BR>> <BR>> Not too sure running encrypted through tor is all that different than <BR>> running encrypted not through TOR. The anonymous bit torrent weanies <BR>> claim you're only safe with them - as ISPs now have stuff to decrypt <BR>> your VPN and see what you're really doing. I don't believe it - they <BR>> could prove traffic to a web site, but not the nature or specifics of <BR>> the traffic. Otherwise SSL would be getting a whole lot stronger, <BR>> daily. A lot of scare mongering and FUD going on out there. It's <BR>> probably a little scary to think how much money they're pulling in, <BR>> for no value.<BR>> <BR>> My impression here of tor is less the anonymity of it than access. I'm <BR>> thinking of China restricted sites to its citizens (Tibet), Egypt, and <BR>> those that tried to shut down the internet pre-Egypt. (I haven't heard <BR>> anything about Libya doing anything with the internet - which seems <BR>> strange, they learned Egypt's lesson in that regard, but no other <BR>> regard so that he's still there and civil war is on???) Is my <BR>> impression here of tor wrong?<BR>> <BR>> I take it it's not possible to divide or split traffic if you're an <BR>> endpoint? Say, sourced from inside the network, let it go out freely, <BR>> otherwise 'tor it'? Secondary ip address? Virtual IP? (Don't some ISPs <BR>> give you a 2nd IP address free, or is that long passe?)<BR>> <BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> kwlug-disc mailing list<BR>> kwlug-disc@kwlug.org<BR>> http://kwlug.org/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org<BR> </body>
</html>