Hope everyone in the US had a good memorial weekend. Anyway, just a quick announcement, due to a system update late last week, the machine running our Tor hidden service was restarted. Unfortunately, the tor configuration file was not properly updated to account for the machine consolidation we did a few weeks ago. As a result, the tor entries for our IRC server were pointing to the wrong box, and since the tor daemon couldn't open a socket, it "helpfully" refused to start all together. This wasn't noticed until Saturday, and I didn't get the email until (late) Monday to get around to fixing it. Needless to say, its back up, and I apologize for the inconvenience.
-- NCommander
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Marand on Tuesday May 26 2015, @06:32AM
"Oh, you think you can relax on a holiday? Fat chance! That sounds like a good time to BREAK!" -- Every piece of hardware ever.
Skynet is active and it's trolling us all. That's why this shit always happens overnight or on holidays. (Or both)
(Score: 2) by sudo rm -rf on Tuesday May 26 2015, @12:24PM
That's why this shit always happens overnight or on holidays. (Or both)
Just like Karius and Bactus [wikipedia.org] seem to wreak havoc on those days.
(Score: 2) by mtrycz on Tuesday May 26 2015, @07:57AM
sooooo... what's the link again?
In capitalist America, ads view YOU!
(Score: 1) by MadTinfoilHatter on Tuesday May 26 2015, @08:11AM
http://7rmath4ro2of2a42.onion/ [7rmath4ro2of2a42.onion]
(Score: 2) by kadal on Tuesday May 26 2015, @02:04PM
This needs to be on the Wiki. If it is, I couldn't find it.
What's the address for the Tor IRC service ?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 26 2015, @08:55AM
What makes you think we can trust the tor service?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 26 2015, @09:09AM
What makes you think we can't
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday May 26 2015, @11:32AM
What makes you think we can't NOT?
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 26 2015, @01:39PM
Not thinks you can't make, what?
(Score: 2) by tibman on Tuesday May 26 2015, @02:12PM
What don't i know?
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 26 2015, @03:39PM
What makes you think you can trust it less than an ordinary connection?
(Score: 2) by NCommander on Tuesday May 26 2015, @08:53PM
You won't have known about the mail server if we hadn't been forthcoming about it. We could have just sat on it, and said nothing. No system is perfect, no security is perfect; our goals on security is to be hard enough that nothing short of a dedicated attack could succeed, and then limit the amount of damage such an attack can accomplish. For all we know, the green site was breached, and whoever owned it chose not to report it publicly.
With us controlling an exit node on tor, your end point can't easily be eavesdropped in unless someone tapped the connection from the tor server to the load balancer; there isn't much we can do about that short of putting SSL through tor, and that is unfortunately painful for a multitide of reasons. Furthermore, using the exit node allows account login and such to actually work since it acts as a static endpoint as far as the frontend is concerned and increases the speed of browsing SN over tor.
Still always moving
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 27 2015, @07:59AM
I admit that I know next to nothing about the technologies involved, so maybe this idea would not work, but anyway:
What about creating a proxy on the very same computer that runs the Tor exit node, which takes the communication from Tor normally, but forwards it over SSL?
Since the proxy would run on the same computer as the exit node, communication between them could only be compromised if the computer running both is compromised, and the connection between the proxy and the load balancer would be SSL protected. And given that SSL is added only by the proxy, you'd not be putting SSL through Tor, thus saving yourself from any trouble that may cause.
(Score: 2) by NCommander on Sunday May 31 2015, @11:13PM
The problem is with the certificate. Either you'd get the soylentnews.org one and get a mismatched, or a self-signed *.onion one which causes the same problem. THere's no good solution to SSL over Tor.
Still always moving