[guardian-dev] Hi, i' new
arrase at gmail.com
Tue Nov 15 09:23:34 EST 2016
What do you think about the most obvious approach?
Use public intents than any other app can call to create/delete a hidden
service or for get config files of his service?
2016-11-15 15:17 GMT+01:00 arrase <arrase at gmail.com>:
> Are you suggesting something? XD
> I can take a look at the problem and propose a solution, it will not be
> fast but I can do it.
> Tonight I will try to compile Orbot from sources and try to familiarize
> myself with the code. (Is there a wiki with info??)
> How do you want to focus the change? What should be possible by a third
> In my opinion:
> - Be able to register a hidden service for your ports without sharing it
> with other applications.
> - Be able to backup the configuration files in order to migrate the
> - Everything should be possible without root
> It would be nice if all this was possible without giving access to the Tor
> configuration port, but right now I can not think of how to do it.
> I keep thinking ..... after working, I'll dedicate some time to the problem
> 2016-11-15 14:19 GMT+01:00 Hans-Christoph Steiner <
> hans at guardianproject.info>:
>> > 2016-11-15 13:23 GMT+01:00 Michael Rogers <michael at briarproject.org>:
>> >> Hi arrase,
>> >> Thanks for discovering this bug. Can you describe how Briar's Tor
>> >> conflicts with Orbot? What problems does it cause? Our goal is for
>> >> to be able to operate on the same device as Orbot without problems.
>> > I do not think it could be called a bug, and definitely not a Briar bug
>> > all. I find it hard to argue in English, I'm sorry.
>> > But if it is true that is a problem if more applications follow the same
>> > path as Briar implementing a Tor daemon within the application.
>> > Briar opens those ports for Tor:
>> > Tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:59050 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 10019 214952 18753
>> > Tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:59051 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 10019 213387 18753
>> > If Orbot starts first, nothing prevents it from taking ports 59050 and
>> > 59051 as control ports. It is a remote but real possibility and would be
>> > more real when more applications opt for the same solution.
>> > It's just an argument about changing the hidden service API for Orbot.
>> > I think there are more strong arguments like that each application can
>> > manage the configuration files of the hidden service to be able to
>> > between devices.
>> > It does not look very good to make an application that uses the hidden
>> > service as a user identifier and if we lose the device we lose our
>> > network of contacts.
>> > I think they are good arguments for bringing about an improvement in
>> > APi as proposed by Nathan.
>> I think we all want to have a nice Intent-based API in Orbot for apps to
>> work with Hidden Services, the real question is: who is going to do the
>> work. That would be a great place for you to start to get involved.
>> PGP fingerprint: EE66 20C7 136B 0D2C 456C 0A4D E9E2 8DEA 00AA 5556
>> List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev
>> To unsubscribe, email: guardian-dev-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the guardian-dev