[guardian-dev] Hi, i' new

Nathan of Guardian nathan at guardianproject.info
Tue Nov 15 17:26:53 EST 2016


As I mentioned in the ticket, you need to run > ndk-build in the
/orbotservice directory to create those native assets first.

We are working on extracting the native binary build components into a
separate gradle dependency, to make working on the app itself, easier.
For now though, yes, you must build!

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016, at 01:19 PM, arrase wrote:
> It's hard to build Orbot, I solved several problems with the toolchain
> but
> now I'm stuck here building Tor binary:
> 
> zip ../orbotservice/src/main/assets/armeabi/pdnsd.mp3
> ../orbotservice/src/main/libs/armeabi/pdnsd
>     zip warning: name not matched:
> ../orbotservice/src/main/libs/armeabi/pdnsd
> 
> zip error: Nothing to do!
> (../orbotservice/src/main/assets/armeabi/pdnsd.mp3)
> 
> Is it a known error?
> 
> For this case I have not found references in google
> 
> 
> 2016-11-15 20:14 GMT+01:00 arrase <arrase at gmail.com>:
> 
> > Great , is all i need to start, many thanks.
> >
> > 2016-11-15 20:02 GMT+01:00 Hans-Christoph Steiner <
> > hans at guardianproject.info>:
> >
> >>
> >> I think it would work like the start/status intents that are currently
> >> in Orbot. The app sends an Intent to Orbot to request a Hidden Service
> >> to be created, then Orbot sends reply status Intents to the app that
> >> made the request with all relevant info, including a FileProvider URI
> >> with GRANT URI permissions so that the requesting app can get the
> >> private key.  That'd be the whole API, unless you also want to make a
> >> "stop hidden service" Intent.
> >>
> >> No need to change anything about the control, the whole API would be
> >> based on those Intents, and we can use the TrustedIntents library to
> >> enforce that the reply only goes to the exact app that requested it.  As
> >> a start, it would be fine to send the reply based on packageName.
> >>
> >> .hc
> >>
> >> arrase:
> >> > 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
> >> > party?
> >> >
> >> > 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
> >> service.
> >> > - 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
> >> >> :
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> arrase:
> >> >>> 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
> >> daemon
> >> >>>> conflicts with Orbot? What problems does it cause? Our goal is for
> >> Briar
> >> >>>> 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
> >> >> at
> >> >>> 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
> >> >> migrate
> >> >>> 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
> >> entire
> >> >>> network of contacts.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I think they are good arguments for bringing about an improvement in
> >> >> Orbot
> >> >>> 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.
> >> >>
> >> >> .hc
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> PGP fingerprint: EE66 20C7 136B 0D2C 456C  0A4D E9E2 8DEA 00AA 5556
> >> >> https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xE9E28DEA00AA5556
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev
> >> >> To unsubscribe, email:  guardian-dev-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> PGP fingerprint: EE66 20C7 136B 0D2C 456C  0A4D E9E2 8DEA 00AA 5556
> >> https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xE9E28DEA00AA5556
> >>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev
> To unsubscribe, email:  guardian-dev-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org


-- 
  Nathan of Guardian
  nathan at guardianproject.info


More information about the guardian-dev mailing list