[Freedombox-discuss] Is / Is Not

Ted Smith tedks at riseup.net
Tue May 31 21:50:28 UTC 2011

On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 17:42 -0400, James Vasile wrote:
> On Tue, 31 May 2011 16:22:56 -0400, Ted Smith <tedks at riseup.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 10:23 -0400, James Vasile wrote:
> > > * Is a torrent client and can use TOR for that purpose.
> > 
> > Is this a typo? Using Tor for BitTorrent traffic is frowned up by the
> > Tor Project, and the default exit policy is to block common BitTorrent
> > ports, and BitTorrent clients commonly leak information which has the
> > capacity to de-anonymize users on the same circuit. I don't see why the
> > FreedomBox Foundation would want to recommend this, as it doesn't make
> > sense from a political or technical standpoint.
> This isn't a typo, but maybe it needs more than a single line to explain
> it!
> It might be the case that each FreedomBox will need a specially
> configured tor/torrent client for talking to other FreedomBoxes.  And we
> might need to confine the traffic to FreedomBox tor nodes.  But it is
> possible to combine tor and torrent without leaking identity and without
> burdening the rest of the tor network.  Exploring that possibility is
> well within the goals of this project.

Have you considered OneSwarm? It's a privacy-enhanced BitTorrent client
that would sidestep the several open engineering problems involved with
building a separate Tor client that knows how to separate protocols into
different circuits. IMHO, OneSwarm should at least be the default _for
now_, since it's available _right now_, whereas this freedombox-tor fork
isn't ;-)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20110531/f329001e/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Freedombox-discuss mailing list