Anonymous Servers - Vidalia doesn't exit when I left click exit in XP.

Author

Vidalia doesn't exit when I left click exit in XP.

Non scrivetemi

2007-03-16, 7:12 pm

The subject says it all, I have to use task manager to be sure
Vidalia has exited. I've seen two instances running at one time.
Haven't tried for 3+.

Gogarty

2007-03-17, 1:13 pm

In article < 555ec242b42790ab36477aa55746a76d@pboxmix
.winstonsmith.info>,
nonscrivetemi@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info says...
>
>
>The subject says it all, I have to use task manager to be sure
>Vidalia has exited. I've seen two instances running at one time.
>Haven't tried for 3+.
>
The problem I am having with Vidalia is it freezes shortly after
starting TOR. TOR continues to run quite happily without Vidalia but
then you have no flexibility in dealing with it.

Anonymous

2007-03-17, 7:13 pm

Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:

> In article < 555ec242b42790ab36477aa55746a76d@pboxmix
.winstonsmith.info>,
> nonscrivetemi@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info says...
> The problem I am having with Vidalia is it freezes shortly after
> starting TOR. TOR continues to run quite happily without Vidalia but
> then you have no flexibility in dealing with it.

That's a good thing. Tor does a fine job all by itself, and more people
bork their security by mucking around with it than anything. Vidalia
is a good Tor marketing, it gives the Wintards a pretty flashing icon
to stare at and the false sense of security they thrive on, but it's
train wreck for anonymity in general.

Anonyma

2007-03-17, 7:13 pm

In article <a883ded4fa78179caebcef9a3845bef1@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>
Anonymous <nobody@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
> Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
>
> That's a good thing. Tor does a fine job all by itself, and more people
> bork their security by mucking around with it than anything. Vidalia
> is a good Tor marketing, it gives the Wintards a pretty flashing icon
> to stare at and the false sense of security they thrive on, but it's
> train wreck for anonymity in general.

And of course you can prove your not just spewing bullshit?

Please give some refs for vidalia's security risks.

I'm not going to hold my breath, btw

Non scrivetemi

2007-03-17, 7:13 pm

On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 18:33:34 +0000, Anonymous wrote:

> That's a good thing. Tor does a fine job all by itself, and more people
> bork their security by mucking around with it than anything. Vidalia
> is a good Tor marketing, it gives the Wintards a pretty flashing icon
> to stare at and the false sense of security they thrive on, but it's
> train wreck for anonymity in general.

Since you like Tor, can you tell us what is it about Vidalia that is a
train wreck for anonymity?

George Orwell

2007-03-17, 7:13 pm

On Sat, 17 Mar 2007, Anonyma <anon-bounces@deuxpi.ca> wrote:
>In article <a883ded4fa78179caebcef9a3845bef1@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>
>Anonymous <nobody@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
>And of course you can prove your not just spewing bullshit?
>
>Please give some refs for vidalia's security risks.
>
>I'm not going to hold my breath, btw

He doesn't have to. He used the word "Wintards" which shows us he is elite
(l33t) and oh, so special. He is probably eithe a Mac genius or a Linux
genius, and so far above us "Wintards" that we should just take what he
says as gospel, without question.

Anonyma

2007-03-17, 7:13 pm

> Since you like Tor, can you tell us what is it about Vidalia that is a
> train wreck for anonymity?

Damn, eelbash, I thought you'd left.

Anonymous Remailer (austria)

2007-03-18, 1:14 am

In article < 21830d714ef0dd73d7963e49f8d444cf@mixmast
er.it>
George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2007, Anonyma <anon-bounces@deuxpi.ca> wrote:
>
> He doesn't have to. He used the word "Wintards" which shows us he is elite
> (l33t) and oh, so special. He is probably eithe a Mac genius or a Linux
> genius, and so far above us "Wintards" that we should just take what he
> says as gospel, without question.

I doubt if he's a Mac guy, they'd complain about Vidalia being too
complicated.

I thought Vidalia was just a GUI frontend for Tor, it really has
nothing to do with the security of Tor.

Gogarty

2007-03-18, 1:13 pm

In article < 4088076360ef0dba230cd0a19f90c81f@remaile
r.privacy.at>,
mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at says...
>
>
>I thought Vidalia was just a GUI frontend for Tor, it really has
>nothing to do with the security of Tor.
>
So far as I can tell, that is correct. And very iseful it is when it does not
freeze. It doesn't freeze on my XP machine. It only freezes on my ME machine,
which is the one running a TOR exit node server. The XP is running only as a
client. How does one tweak TOR without Vidalia?

George Orwell

2007-03-18, 1:13 pm

Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:

> In article < 4088076360ef0dba230cd0a19f90c81f@remaile
r.privacy.at>,
> mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at says...
> So far as I can tell, that is correct. And very iseful it is when it does not
> freeze. It doesn't freeze on my XP machine. It only freezes on my ME machine,
> which is the one running a TOR exit node server. The XP is running only as a
> client. How does one tweak TOR without Vidalia?

There you have it. Running a Tor server without a clue.

And you can still ask why a Wintard at the wheel is a bad thing?

>

Nomen Nescio

2007-03-18, 7:13 pm

> There you have it. Running a Tor server without a clue.
To suggest that only experts should run a service is in itself clueless.

> And you can still ask why a Wintard at the wheel is a bad thing?
Judging a person by the Operating System they run is a little childish. The
last thing the Tor project needs is OS egotism.

Gogarty

2007-03-18, 7:13 pm

In article < b8c52373b9dbb0b6d9802bc6cec8e0fa@mixmast
er.it>,
nobody@mixmaster.it says...
>
>
>Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
not[vbcol=seagreen]
machine,[vbcol=seagreen]
a[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>There you have it. Running a Tor server without a clue.
>
>And you can still ask why a Wintard at the wheel is a bad thing?
>
Sheesh! What is it with you people? Ask a simple question and get slammed?
Perhaps you could have answered the question?

Nomen Nescio

2007-03-18, 7:13 pm

On Sun, 18 Mar 2007, George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
>There you have it. Running a Tor server without a clue.
>
>And you can still ask why a Wintard at the wheel is a bad thing?

Grouping all Windows users together under the heading "Wintards" is as fair
as grouping all *nix users together under the heading"know-it-all
social-reject geekazoids with no hope at all of having girlfriends" or all
Apple users together as "pompous arrogant snot-heads insisting that 'no
choice in peripherals' is a *good* thing".

Wait, maybe it's accurate even if it isn't fair.

Anonymous

2007-03-18, 7:13 pm

In article <sNmdnWyxg80HoWDYnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bway.net>
Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
> In article < 4088076360ef0dba230cd0a19f90c81f@remaile
r.privacy.at>,
> mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at says...
> So far as I can tell, that is correct. And very iseful it is when it does not
> freeze. It doesn't freeze on my XP machine. It only freezes on my ME machine,
> which is the one running a TOR exit node server. The XP is running only as a
> client. How does one tweak TOR without Vidalia?

You never mention the speed of your cpu, memory etc. I don't see any
minimum requirements
in the Tor docs but old hardware won't cut it with some modern software.

Also, as I remember, ME's IP software isn't as robust as XP. I found
this link for
tweaking ME. http://www.burzurq.com/forum/trevtweak.html

Gogarty

2007-03-19, 1:13 am

In article <36a1ef93b1a75a70207f02b27195ce59@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>,
nobody@mixmin.net says...
>
>
>In article <sNmdnWyxg80HoWDYnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bway.net>
>Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
not[vbcol=seagreen]
machine,[vbcol=seagreen]
a[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>You never mention the speed of your cpu, memory etc. I don't see any
>minimum requirements
>in the Tor docs but old hardware won't cut it with some modern software.
>
>Also, as I remember, ME's IP software isn't as robust as XP. I found
>this link for
>tweaking ME. http://www.burzurq.com/forum/trevtweak.html
>
When you start TOR with Vidalia under ME, you get a message to the effect "You
are running ME. This probably won't work." But it does work. Until Vidalia
freezes and TOR just keeps on chugging along. Vidalia runs long enough to set
up the parameters for the server.

The machine is an antique Dell Inspiron 4000. But it is connected to a DSL
network. It is showing a bandwidth of 40 to 50 MB/S. Nothing else is running
on that mnachine.

Zax

2007-03-19, 7:13 am

On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:39:05 -0400, Gogarty wrote in
Message-Id: <luGdnWszNJ4hdGDYnZ2dnUVZ_h3inZ2d@bway.net>:

> The machine is an antique Dell Inspiron 4000. But it is connected to a DSL
> network. It is showing a bandwidth of 40 to 50 MB/S. Nothing else is running
> on that mnachine.

Why don't you try running one of the 'Windows Expert' options that don't
package Privoxy and Vidalia? You would then configure Tor through its
torrc file which (by default) resides in:
C:\Documents and Settings\%username%\Application Data\Tor\torrc

I suggest editing the file with Wordpad.

--
pub 1024D/8ED57743 2003-07-08 Bananasplit Operator
Key fingerprint = 796F 67E0 E890 A0BB BDAE EBB4 94A6 7A09 8ED5 7743
uid Admin <admin.bananasplit.info>

Borked Pseudo Mailed

2007-03-19, 1:14 pm

Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

> To suggest that only experts should run a service is in itself clueless.

Typical Wintard response. When it's pointed out you're bumbling along
without a single shred of anything resembling a clue, stomp
your fat little feet and scream "EXPERT!".

You don't have to be a mechanical engineer to drive a car Einstein, but
you do have to learn where the gas goes, how to read street signs, and
be bright enough to know it needs to go to a mechanic when smoke pours
out from under the hood.

Unfortunately Gates and company have surgically removed the ability to
master those basics from an all too large percentage of the computing
population. Not a huge problem for the rest of us if you'd just stick
to reading your email and whining a lot, but you don't. You're so far
gone you think fingering your little icon qualifies you as a system
administrator. It's the same mentality that brought us email and
document viruses. If it's colorful and you can click on it, it MUST be
a good idea, right?

Wrong. And the more incompetent "operators" the Tor network collects,
the closer it is to becoming a total security disaster. History
guarantees it.

Nomen Nescio

2007-03-19, 7:14 pm

Nomen Nescio wrote:

> Grouping all Windows users together

Nobody grouped anything. Lots of people can sit in front of a
Winblows box all day long and not walk away Wintarded.

Goarty isn't one of them.

Anonyma

2007-03-19, 7:14 pm

Gogarty wrote:

> In article < 4088076360ef0dba230cd0a19f90c81f@remaile
r.privacy.at>,
> mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at says...
> So far as I can tell, that is correct. And very iseful it is when it
> does not freeze. It doesn't freeze on my XP machine. It only freezes
> on my ME machine, which is the one running a TOR exit node server.
> The XP is running only as a client. How does one tweak TOR without
> Vidalia?

If anyone needed an example of Chronic Wintard Syndrome, by God there
it is in all its glory.

Not only are you so clueless you don't realize programs have
configuration files, you're so lazy you haven't bothered to even skim
over a manual, or you would.

You click and pray, and even when things crash right in front of your
eyes you let shit run anyway. No idea at all if your software is
working properly or not, and the fact that you're still trying to run a
"freezing" version of Vidalia under ME tells us you don't care enough
to invest the 5 seconds it would take for you to find out what's wrong
or how to fix it.

To be fair, you're exceptional even among Wintards. We knew that much
from the idiotic "Tor doesn't work" crap you posted when you first
appeared. You're extreme Wintardedness defined. Every last IQ point
sucked from your empty skull, and ambition starved to death without
them.

You ARE the train wreck Goarty. Congratulations.

Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer

2007-03-20, 1:15 am

In article <07e833ba2e2eb67f1b5a034f4e4ba99b@deuxpi.ca>
Anonyma <anon-bounces@deuxpi.ca> wrote:
>
> To be fair, you're exceptional even among Wintards. We knew that much
> from the idiotic "Tor doesn't work" crap you posted when you first
> appeared.

He posted asking how to get Tor to log all traffic from his tor
exit server back in January
Message-ID: <V_WdnbZoL6cz1CvYnZ2dnUVZ_ufinZ2d@bway.net>

I promptly added him to my tor ExcludeNodes option. The server is
called Yeraz for anyone else who wishes to block them, or you can use
the key id of $E22B972C5012EE33559C851217608A27CAB86A4
A to block it.

The IP address is 216.220.98.32 in case they decide to do an identity
change.

Gogarty

2007-03-20, 1:12 pm

Well, I have to confess I am utterly puzzled by the level of invective
here. For what? For asking a question? For contributing to the TOR
project?

And oh yeah, torrc on ME resides quite somewhere else.

Gogarty

2007-03-20, 1:12 pm

In article < 280d70b899ea97dd09621e5582269db2@remaile
r.cyberiade.it>,
anonymous@remailer.cyberiade.it says...
>
>
>In article <07e833ba2e2eb67f1b5a034f4e4ba99b@deuxpi.ca>
>Anonyma <anon-bounces@deuxpi.ca> wrote:
>
>He posted asking how to get Tor to log all traffic from his tor
>exit server back in January
>Message-ID: <V_WdnbZoL6cz1CvYnZ2dnUVZ_ufinZ2d@bway.net>
>
>I promptly added him to my tor ExcludeNodes option. The server is
>called Yeraz for anyone else who wishes to block them, or you can use
>the key id of $E22B972C5012EE33559C851217608A27CAB86A4
A to block it.
>
>The IP address is 216.220.98.32 in case they decide to do an identity
>change.
>
Well, don't this just beat all. How does it trouble me if you block the
server I am running for the general benefit of the TOR project? What is
it with you people?

Anonymous

2007-03-20, 1:12 pm

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 08:26:19 -0400, Gogarty wrote:

> Well, I have to confess I am utterly puzzled by the level of invective
> here. For what? For asking a question? For contributing to the TOR
> project?
>
> And oh yeah, torrc on ME resides quite somewhere else.

This group has a higher percentage of anonymous posts than most, and being
anonymous probably brings out the nastier side of a lot of people.

Gogarty

2007-03-20, 1:12 pm

In article < 7ab9e05c9457c88d8f8ed5d4554db644@remaile
r.paranoici.org>,
nobody@remailer.paranoici.org says...
>
>
>On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 08:26:19 -0400, Gogarty wrote:
>
>
>This group has a higher percentage of anonymous posts than most, and being
>anonymous probably brings out the nastier side of a lot of people.
>
One would not want to associate with them in real life. I can almost
sympathize with the poor sods, their lives being so mean and petty and
bereft of meaning that they can only get their jollies by bashing other
people.

Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer

2007-03-20, 1:12 pm

On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:39:05 -0400, Gogarty wrote:

>
> The machine is an antique Dell Inspiron 4000. But it is connected to a DSL
> network. It is showing a bandwidth of 40 to 50 MB/S. Nothing else is running
> on that mnachine.

Try another OS.

Gogarty

2007-03-20, 1:12 pm

In article < 7eb88c873a4da8a2d6b5f23bee54c645@remaile
r.cyberiade.it>,
anonymous@remailer.cyberiade.it says...
>
>
>On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:39:05 -0400, Gogarty wrote:
>
running[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>Try another OS.
>
Won't fit. Machine does not meet even minimum requirements for XP. Caused huge
angst when I tried to install t and keep existing programs. And anyway, it
runs fine on ME, error messages to the contrary notwithstanding.

I can run a server off any of the other three machines but see no need to.

auntivyrus@remailer-debian.panta-rhei.eu.org,

2007-03-20, 7:12 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article < 7eb88c873a4da8a2d6b5f23bee54c645@remaile
r.cyberiade.it>
Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer <anonymous@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:39:05 -0400, Gogarty wrote:
>
>
> Try another OS.

Yah, like Debian Gnu Linux

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iQA/ AwUBRgAYcwc1ZuHjbNh8EQJhoACfYvy7JOjqZuqz
GD5mHyI4ISrWPwYAnRDZ
QF4F0TL5S5WEajsy6LxgcppL
=a6T+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
for abuse and hashcash info.

George Orwell

2007-03-20, 7:12 pm

Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
> Won't fit. Machine does not meet even minimum requirements for XP. Caused huge
> angst when I tried to install t and keep existing programs. And anyway, it
> runs fine on ME, error messages to the contrary notwithstanding.
>
> I can run a server off any of the other three machines but see no need to.

Tor requires that the operating system can open hundreds, even thousands
of connections and keep them open. Windows ME like all the other 9x
based systems can't open more than a small amount of connections at
any one time. Hell, even 2K and XP need some tweaking to do it.

While your machine may not meet the requirements to run XP, I'm sure
it would meet the requirements to run a Linux distro. I have an old
Pentium 133mhz sitting in another room that runs a Tor server,
Mixminion node, web server and other things quite happily. Linux won't
cost you anything either.

Anonyma

2007-03-21, 1:16 am

In article <BemdnTVvovaXSWLYnZ2dnUVZ_v3inZ2d@bway.net>
Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
> Well, don't this just beat all. How does it trouble me if you block the
> server I am running for the general benefit of the TOR project?

What bizarre brain processes caused you to believe that running an
exit node that logs all traffic benefits the tor project in any way?

> What is it with you people?

You're surprised that people in an anonymity and privacy newsgroup
have a problem with a person who admitted wanting to run a tor node
so he could monitor and log everything that went through it?

It's alt.privacy.anon-server. Other than eelbash, the people that
hang out in this group generally object to people wanting to monitor
and log stuff. Know your audience.

2007-03-21, 1:16 am

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote in
news:7dd94ff84b1c1ca497faa25964606e29@mi
xmaster.it:

> Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
> Tor requires that the operating system can open hundreds, even
> thousands of connections and keep them open. Windows ME like all the
> other 9x based systems can't open more than a small amount of
> connections at any one time. Hell, even 2K and XP need some tweaking
> to do it.
>
> While your machine may not meet the requirements to run XP, I'm sure
> it would meet the requirements to run a Linux distro. I have an old
> Pentium 133mhz sitting in another room that runs a Tor server,
> Mixminion node, web server and other things quite happily. Linux won't
> cost you anything either.

I've managed to run Tor on an old win98se 200mhz without a lot of
problems. The main thing I had to do was tweak a registry entry:

REGEDIT4

& #91;HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentCon
trolSet\Services\VxD\MSTCP]
"MaxConnections"="512"

....and reboot.

This allowed enough connections for Tor or Freenet to operate in 9x.
It's a kludge, but it works

- --
http://blog.peculiarplace.com
http://offthecuff.lurasbookcase.com
http://peculiarplace.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.52

iQEVAwUBRgCGvHV+YnyE1GYEAQiaNgf/f7y+IeClWSLHmVhYHztKbi3jfUSxu6kN
ArmHTvYY5aB94ui2IJBt+bgiOKeEZnDhjf0FT3xH
EdCLiID89JRsYYHZjznP9J7L
B4XLbyGKu+pQjCjG4QBc7vhayLwOUhlhBRT2GLKi
zbY6U9ImzwLhbyVp8zUUbjwU
6lBMiPPMhZKaPVNQUaG3W8SSthSg53oF9pcobxKl
SfsXhXYaIZII0Sir8gDMlgDf
fuN9rNm9o+PtG39d+eLU6CTlaabhIbp1S+MAkb2W
Owd8KhCmYtKjW+Y36ovEMWuB
1qz2LpFUK5qxpD28bFgHhdKtB09nkAMf0M6RLjTp
mUCTK3rGn3lBkA==
=KwZ9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

George Orwell

2007-03-21, 1:16 am

Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:

> In article < 280d70b899ea97dd09621e5582269db2@remaile
r.cyberiade.it>,
> anonymous@remailer.cyberiade.it says...
> Well, don't this just beat all. How does it trouble me if you block the
> server I am running for the general benefit of the TOR project?

Don't flatter yourself. Nobody's cares about troubling you, you're not
that important. The goal is to not expose our traffic to evil nodes.
You're in more than a couple ExcludeNodes lists, guaranteed.

If you're logging all activity you're not running anything to benefit
anyone. You're attacking Tor, even if you're too damned stupid to
realize it.

> What is it with you people?

We don't like ignorant, incompetent, insidious little snoops. Ask
Eelbash what that's all about. You're just like him.

>

Gogarty

2007-03-21, 1:14 pm

In article < 7dd94ff84b1c1ca497faa25964606e29@mixmast
er.it>,
nobody@mixmaster.it says...
>
>
>Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
huge[vbcol=seagreen]
it[vbcol=seagreen]
to.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>Tor requires that the operating system can open hundreds, even thousands
>of connections and keep them open. Windows ME like all the other 9x
>based systems can't open more than a small amount of connections at
>any one time. Hell, even 2K and XP need some tweaking to do it.
>
>While your machine may not meet requirements to run XP, I'm sure
>it would meet the requirements to run a Linux distro. I have an old
>Pentium 133mhz sitting in another room that runs a Tor server,
>Mixminion node, web server and other things quite happily. Linux won't
>cost you anything either.
>
You make an excellent point there. The ME Machine is an excellent one with
which to the experiment with Linux. Thanks for the suggestion.

Gogarty

2007-03-21, 1:14 pm

In article <28dc18ca89102e258e9dccd46810dbdc@deuxpi.ca>, anon-
bounces@deuxpi.ca says...
>
>
>In article <BemdnTVvovaXSWLYnZ2dnUVZ_v3inZ2d@bway.net>
>Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
the[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>What bizarre brain processes caused you to believe that running an
>exit node that logs all traffic benefits the tor project in any way?
>
Well, first of all, I am not running an exit node that logs all traffic.
As a new discoverer of TOR, I was merely curious about what crosses my
computer and asked a simple question. A simple "that's a no no" (and
somebody did say that) would and did bring me to my usually good senses.
Hell, it's to MY advantage to have no idea what is crossing my
connections. And in any case, who said anything about logging the
traffic? I detest logs. You may believe what you wish, but how do I know
you are not logging the traffic? And did that fellow who obviously keeps
very big logs really serve the project by posting the name and address of
my server and invite people to block it? No skin off my nose, just one
less strable node for the project.

Gogarty

2007-03-21, 1:14 pm

In article < 231fa2083e5b44362488d941fa65e4e1@mixmast
er.it>,
nobody@mixmaster.it says...
>
>
>Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
much[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>Don't flatter yourself. Nobody's cares about troubling you, you're not
>that important. The goal is to not expose our traffic to evil nodes.
>You're in more than a couple ExcludeNodes lists, guaranteed.

Oh goody!

>If you're logging all activity you're not running anything to benefit
>anyone. You're attacking Tor, even if you're too damned stupid to
>realize it.

Look, sonny, I asked a simple question that was an error. One courteous
soul pointed that out. The rest of you just piled on. So XXXX the lot of
you.
>
>
>We don't like ignorant, incompetent, insidious little snoops. Ask
>Eelbash what that's all about. You're just like him.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps if you got up from
that keyboard in your foetid bedroom and went out for a breath of fresh
air you would understand that not everything is evil intent. I suspect I
have been running computers since before you were born, way back when
programs came on stacks of 80-column punched cards and there was no such
thing as lower case and the Osborne was the wave of the future and
communication was via phone lines and acoustic couplers.

Borked Pseudo Mailed

2007-03-21, 1:14 pm

Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:

> In article <28dc18ca89102e258e9dccd46810dbdc@deuxpi.ca>, anon-
> bounces@deuxpi.ca says...
> the
> Well, first of all, I am not running an exit node that logs all traffic.

No? Then how does your node know to hibernate when certain sites are
visited? Or weren't you aware that software exists to scan exit nodes
for bad behavior?

You sir, are a bald faced liar.

George Orwell

2007-03-21, 1:14 pm

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 20:19:38 -0400, Anonyma wrote:

> In article <BemdnTVvovaXSWLYnZ2dnUVZ_v3inZ2d@bway.net>
> Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
> What bizarre brain processes caused you to believe that running an
> exit node that logs all traffic benefits the tor project in any way?
>
>
> You're surprised that people in an anonymity and privacy newsgroup
> have a problem with a person who admitted wanting to run a tor node
> so he could monitor and log everything that went through it?
>
> It's alt.privacy.anon-server. Other than eelbash, the people that
> hang out in this group generally object to people wanting to monitor
> and log stuff. Know your audience.

You are just excusing rudeness. Something can be objected to without
larding the objection with insults and obscenity.

If you want people to use anonymous remailers and other anonymity
software, how are you helping by excusing such rudeness? People that come
here to learn aren't going to have a very good opinion of remailers when
they come across the trash you are excusing.

Anonyma

2007-03-21, 1:14 pm

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
>Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
>
>No? Then how does your node know to hibernate when certain sites are
>visited? Or weren't you aware that software exists to scan exit nodes
>for bad behavior?
>
>You sir, are a bald faced liar.

ROFL!! "D'oh!"

Busted! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!!!

George Orwell

2007-03-21, 1:14 pm

Gogarty wrote:

> Look, sonny, I asked a simple question that was an error. One

What you DID was ask about logging, then try and argue about it when
several people told you why it was a bad idea. At which point you got
your lame XXX royally kicked but still couldn't manage to grow up
enough to admit you're FOS.

And that was AFTER you tried to convince us Tor was useless as a
privacy and anonymity tool. <laugh>

Don't EVER fool yourself into believing X-No-Archive and short memories
will shelter you from your own stupidity.

Gogarty

2007-03-21, 7:13 pm

In article <39b5b8bc4c38cb0832a17ed25afcb0b1@pseudo.borked.net>,
nobody@pseudo.borked.net says...
>

>No? Then how does your node know to hibernate when certain sites are
>visited?

Really? I did not know that. The hibernate problem, if that's what it is,
was apparently caused by too high a bandwidth which caused my little
system to overload. It is a 600 MHz processor with all of 64 MB RAM and a
4 GB drive. After a period of time when there is no drive activity at
all, the drive starts burping and eventually starts running full time,
which indicates to me that data was flowing in faster than it could get
out and being shunted to the swap file, probably with lots of dropped
packets. I had noticed that after running for 24 hours or so it just
stopped functioning and the system had to be rebooted and TOR restarted
from scratch. A kind person on another group suggested that I customize
the bandwidth to a lower level. Which I did and that seems to have solved
the problem. But now (or yesterday, I have not checked today) I notice
that the node list shows two servers with the same name and address. One
shows with no DIRPort, the other with both ORPort and DIRPort. One is
listed as stable but not running and the other as running but not stable.
How did that happen?

And what do you mean by "when certain sites are visited?" By whom? Do you
mean that when I visit a site with my browser my server goes into
hibernation? Or when somebody else visits a site it hibernates?

Or weren't you aware that software exists to scan exit nodes
>for bad behavior?

Yes of course. Google knows all.

>
>You sir, are a bald faced liar.

Really? Do you feel better calling people names when you know nothing
about the matter? I would ask for an apology but there's no point to that.
Amazing that on the one hand I am accused of being an evil person
deliberately setting out compromise TOR but on the other a total nitwit
who has no idea what he is doing. Can't be both.

But further to the discussion, if the data flowing through the server does
not cause drive activity, does that mean the data are flowing only through
the RAM and that none of it will be found on the machine when it is shut
down? If true, does that not greatly enhance TOR security?

Gogarty

2007-03-21, 7:13 pm

In article < 75ce4261d251bf58ee09c833ac1114ac@mixmast
er.it>,
nobody@mixmaster.it says...
>
>
>Gogarty wrote:
>
>
>What you DID was ask about logging,

Was that wrong? In any case, I was not asking about logging. I was
asking if it were possible to see the traffic going through one's
computer. That's not logging unless you retain the data. I keep no
logs of any kind.

'e then try and argue about it when
>several people told you why it was a bad idea.

No. One person said it was a bad idea, with whom I promptly agreed. I
never argued. The rest of you just piled on with obscenties, no help
at all.

>At which point you got
>your lame XXX royally kicked but still couldn't manage to grow up
>enough to admit you're FOS.

I do get pissed off when people attack me.
>
>And that was AFTER you tried to convince us Tor was useless as a
>privacy and anonymity tool. <laugh>

I think you have me greatly confused with someone else. I have never,
ever even imputed that TOR was useless as an anonymity tool. I have
been a strongly believing participant in the project ever since I
learned of it. To my mind it is the best simple to use anonymity tool
now existing with potential to be even better. Also, it takes a
certain amount of sang froid to run an unlimited exit server since my
IP could turn up as somebody else's naughty traffic. A very good
reason for keeping no logs and being willfully ignorant about what is
exiting that node.

>
>Don't EVER fool yourself into believing X-No-Archive and short
memories
>will shelter you from your own stupidity.

You keep logs, do you? My, my. The short -- indeed defective -- memory
is yours. So is the stupidity.

George Orwell

2007-03-21, 7:13 pm

Gogarty wrote:

<snip strangely rambling babble>

> And what do you mean by "when certain sites are visited?" By whom? Do
> you

There's utilities that perform tests for keyword filters among other
things. Some of them are even in Tor CVS. If you're filtering or
blocking access to sites you'll get nailed eventually.

Or maybe you already have?

To be blunt about it the way you conduct yourself here makes your
denial questionable. And the fact that you've proffered an explanation
at all to this out of the blue revelation suggests the stated odd
behavior at least, is fact.

>
> Really? Do you feel better calling people names when you know nothing
> about the matter? I would ask for an apology but there's no point to
> that. Amazing that on the one hand I am accused of being an evil
> person deliberately setting out compromise TOR but on the other a
> total nitwit who has no idea what he is doing. Can't be both.

Sure it can. That's why you've been compared to Jiang "Eelbash" Wu. He
has a long and distinguished record of trying to molest the remailer
network, but being too damed dumb to pull it off. The one time he
thought for sure he busted an abuser it turned out to be the wrong guy
in fact. The rest of his attempts to "adjust" anonymity to his own
warped sense of right and wrong have resulted in nothing but amusing
embarrassments.

Sort of like it would for someone who was content filtering at a Tor
exit and tried to explain the effect away with "throttling"
explanations that for the most part didn't make much sense at all.

<shrug>

Aunti Virus

2007-03-21, 7:13 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article < f5a737c90e91235409422d5589be9cfb@mixmast
er.it>
George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 20:19:38 -0400, Anonyma wrote:
>
>
> You are just excusing rudeness. Something can be objected to without
> larding the objection with insults and obscenity.
>
> If you want people to use anonymous remailers and other anonymity
> software, how are you helping by excusing such rudeness? People that come
> here to learn aren't going to have a very good opinion of remailers when
> they come across the trash you are excusing.

The problem is that if you're going to have true anonymity then there are
going to be people that abuse it. This is guaranteed and there is no way
to change it that would not destroy anonymity. The ONLY thing any one
person can do about it is to make the choice NOT to be one of the abusers.
No one can be responsible for another's choices of behaviour. You tend to
yours, I'll tend to mine, and everybody else is on their own.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iQA/ AwUBRgGXDwc1ZuHjbNh8EQJRYwCfVOKW8+NKXseu
JM3m408RgEfsOksAn2/U
CxP+Ng0xQQKWBntDu0aYbZFL
=LfIi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
for abuse and hashcash info.

Gogarty

2007-03-21, 7:13 pm

In article < f4cf5c489da65c3b9dd7af5260ffa9f0@mixmast
er.it>,
nobody@mixmaster.it says...
>

>There's utilities that perform tests for keyword filters among other
>things. Some of them are even in Tor CVS.

Is that so?

If you're filtering or
>blocking access to sites you'll get nailed eventually.

Explain why I would want to do that.
>
>Or maybe you already have?
>
>To be blunt about it the way you conduct yourself here makes your
>denial questionable. And the fact that you've proffered an explanation
>at all to this out of the blue revelation suggests the stated odd
>behavior at least, is fact.

Jeez. Not much one can do with the paranoid. If you're such a hotshot
tell me what I am filtering or blocking.
>
>
>Sort of like it would for someone who was content filtering at a Tor
>exit and tried to explain the effect away with "throttling"
>explanations that for the most part didn't make much sense at all.

"Throttling." That's the word; that's the word. I don't restrict any
kind of traffic on the server, which is currently sending a whole lot
more than it is receiving. I have restricted the average and peak
bandwidths at 44 and 90. At that level the system does not choke. What
does make sense, oh mighty TOR expert.

George Orwell

2007-03-21, 7:13 pm

In article < f5a737c90e91235409422d5589be9cfb@mixmast
er.it>
Eelbash Admin <admin@eelbash.yi.org> wrote:
>
> You are just excusing rudeness. Something can be objected to without
> larding the objection with insults and obscenity.
>
> If you want people to use anonymous remailers and other anonymity
> software, how are you helping by excusing such rudeness? People that come
> here to learn aren't going to have a very good opinion of remailers when
> they come across the trash you are excusing.
>

Eelbash, time has shown that people that genuinely come here to learn
how to run a remailer or a tor server are treated perfectly nicely.

People who come here and ask how to censor, log and monitor are going
to get flamed.

Quite honestly, if a *genuine* wannabe remailer admin comes here
asking for help and gets a few anonymous flames and can't handle it,
how do you expect them to handle the abuse that would come out of
their remailer either?

> You are just excusing rudeness.

You are just excusing monitoring and censorship.

Gogarty

2007-03-21, 7:13 pm

In article < 6f93654c2986866abff84a632b84ef85@mixmast
er.it>,
nobody@mixmaster.it says...
>
>
>In article < f5a737c90e91235409422d5589be9cfb@mixmast
er.it>
>Eelbash Admin <admin@eelbash.yi.org> wrote:
>
>Eelbash, time has shown that people that genuinely come here to learn
>how to run a remailer or a tor server are treated perfectly nicely.
>
>People who come here and ask how to censor, log and monitor are going
>to get flamed.
>
>Quite honestly, if a *genuine* wannabe remailer admin comes here
>asking for help and gets a few anonymous flames and can't handle it,
>how do you expect them to handle the abuse that would come out of
>their remailer either?
>
>
>You are just excusing monitoring and censorship.
>
No. You are excusing rudeness. I can't see anyone coming here for honest
information about privacy. To many potty-mouths.

Nomen Nescio

2007-03-22, 1:14 am

In article <7aadnY_kptgSXJzbnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@bway.net>
Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
> In article < 6f93654c2986866abff84a632b84ef85@mixmast
er.it>,
> nobody@mixmaster.it says...
> No. You are excusing rudeness. I can't see anyone coming here for honest
> information about privacy. To many potty-mouths.

Potty-mouths????

Wow...I see you're a real rugged type guy

Aunti Virus

2007-03-22, 7:14 am

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <7aadnY_kptgSXJzbnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@bway.net>
Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>
> In article < 6f93654c2986866abff84a632b84ef85@mixmast
er.it>,
> nobody@mixmaster.it says...
> No. You are excusing rudeness. I can't see anyone coming here for honest
> information about privacy. To many potty-mouths.

"potty-mouths"?!?!??

Is that the best you can say girly man?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iQA/ AwUBRgIDwAc1ZuHjbNh8EQKlIQCgih61feYkyILl
YzFgQ0OfIpgUw9wAn2KZ
wHt9TaI6uGVVUcmrimQNEsRn
=LHJL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
for abuse and hashcash info.

Nomen Nescio

2007-03-22, 1:14 pm

Gogarty wrote:
> No. You are excusing rudeness. I can't see anyone coming here for honest
> information about privacy. To many potty-mouths.
>
>

Why are you arguing? This person is of no importance at all. Do you
not know who he is? Do you not realize that the most vocally abusive is
a very well known pedophile angry that some of us Tor ops have blocked
his favorite child porn server? Seriously, I am not joking, that is
exactly with whom you are arguing. His superior air and rudeness are
dead giveaways that tie his anon persona to his identifiable one. Don't
argue with the pedos.

2007-03-22, 1:14 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in
news:796656fcc857a4eb4a42064ff93b0aec@di
zum.com:

> Gogarty wrote:
>
> Why are you arguing? This person is of no importance at all. Do you
> not know who he is? Do you not realize that the most vocally abusive
> is a very well known pedophile angry that some of us Tor ops have
> blocked his favorite child porn server? Seriously, I am not joking,
> that is exactly with whom you are arguing. His superior air and
> rudeness are dead giveaways that tie his anon persona to his
> identifiable one. Don't argue with the pedos.

On the contrary, the post being replied to is posted by anonymous
remailer, which means you have NO certainty who may have written it. You
may suspect someone, but by definition you cannot prove or be certain
at all.

This makes YOU little more than an anonymous troll.

- --
http://blog.peculiarplace.com
http://offthecuff.lurasbookcase.com
http://peculiarplace.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.52

iQEVAwUBRgKDjnV+YnyE1GYEAQgelwgAhluCE5rw
ProUebzH3acakWpcmZ2lTtdV
4zNBJQJpIG2QwGHmD3UDUkoj6CmVSt3M9oPsGWgJ
Oh2foqGIC+EZZ6iMzeXpd27e
Sjw0ZkMp25HvM4vZYZjSS4bsXWTIR5hqOPeEkycX
dvnvP5lGIG2udZVl+6fooM7p
I93mtwe15Qw2zydV9DdBQ9lWEuw1Dx7IMlQqhzkl
4taarDN0vNORSUhW5KT4BZzN
cxlf6OOZZfzrslfVay+xio7GK7uiWJ+aV3hhrDlV
DO2qB5qjn2D4t1ttq92bSgMF
3/ mFvpOIR8nLCfP1ctsSsjXo5EfS1TAlJfkfwxab4s
H+XR0mYljVpA==
=sgSJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Anonymous Sender

2007-03-24, 1:14 am

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 21:39:03 +0000, Aunti Virus wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> In article < f5a737c90e91235409422d5589be9cfb@mixmast
er.it>
> George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>
>
> The problem is that if you're going to have true anonymity then there are
> going to be people that abuse it.

No kidding?

This is guaranteed and there is no
> way to change it that would not destroy anonymity. The ONLY thing any
> one person can do about it is to make the choice NOT to be one of the
> abusers. No one can be responsible for another's choices of behaviour.
> You tend to yours, I'll tend to mine, and everybody else is on their own.

Brilliant stuff. Really. Food for thought.

To get back to the topic, this group is the main group for discussions of
anonymous software, as far as I know. If you want to promote anonymity,
you probably want newcomers to be able to ask questions here and get help.

Do you think they will hang around or have a good impression of remailers
and the people who run them if they see questions answered with insults
and obscenities?

If you think they won't, do you think it might discourage the people who
hurl insults and obscenities if lovers of anonymity like you speak up and
criticize the people who hurl insults and obscenities?

If your philosophy is 'you tend to yours, I'll tend to mine', what do you
think those newcomers will do when they see people like you quietly
tending to whatever you tend to, and people like the ones who hurl insults
and obscenities tending to their insults and obscenities?

Don't you think they will think that people involved with anonymous
remailers are fools at best and lowlifes at worst?

>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: N/A
>
> iQA/ AwUBRgGXDwc1ZuHjbNh8EQJRYwCfVOKW8+NKXseu
JM3m408RgEfsOksAn2/U
> CxP+Ng0xQQKWBntDu0aYbZFL
> =LfIi
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
> The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
> is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
> than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
> for abuse and hashcash info.

Anonymous

2007-03-24, 1:14 am

In article < 555ec242b42790ab36477aa55746a76d@pboxmix
.winstonsmith.info>
"Non scrivetemi" <nonscrivetemi@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info> wrote:
>
> The subject says it all, I have to use task manager to be sure
> Vidalia has exited. I've seen two instances running at one time.
> Haven't tried for 3+.

Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

Maybe it's a nefarious plot to track my
internet usage.

Or maybe it's a programming mistake that they
will correct in the next release.

Aunti Virus

2007-03-24, 7:12 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article < ad2a45853df7b985abb8bc8893b4a22a@remaile
r.metacolo.com>
Anonymous Sender <anonymous@remailer.metacolo.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 21:39:03 +0000, Aunti Virus wrote:
>
>
> No kidding?

Oh my, Sonny you do have a smart mouth on you don't you?

> This is guaranteed and there is no
>
> Brilliant stuff. Really. Food for thought.

If only you showed a willingness to think it would be.

> To get back to the topic, this group is the main group for discussions of
> anonymous software, as far as I know. If you want to promote anonymity,
> you probably want newcomers to be able to ask questions here and get help.
>
> Do you think they will hang around or have a good impression of remailers
> and the people who run them if they see questions answered with insults
> and obscenities?
>
> If you think they won't, do you think it might discourage the people who
> hurl insults and obscenities if lovers of anonymity like you speak up and
> criticize the people who hurl insults and obscenities?

I have plenty to say about filthy people, with and without any kind of
identity. You've read plenty of it in this newsgroup if you've been around
long enough to dry behind your ears. (which I doubt because of how much you
sound like my 12 year old great grandson.)

> If your philosophy is 'you tend to yours, I'll tend to mine', what do you
> think those newcomers will do when they see people like you quietly
> tending to whatever you tend to, and people like the ones who hurl insults
> and obscenities tending to their insults and obscenities?
>
> Don't you think they will think that people involved with anonymous
> remailers are fools at best and lowlifes at worst?

What do you want then? For me to post non-anonymously? Sorry child, it
just ain't gonna happen, this old gal's gonna keep her identity to herself.
Why? Because it's my option to do so and none of your business beyond
that.

Since most of us here are anonymous by choice, everybody tending to their
own behaviour is the only possible choice.

As for newbies. If they have the sense the good lord gave a doughnut
they'll be able to figure out that the nastier people are the ones not to
bother reading. They can tell when people post helpful responses, of which
there are plenty as long as the requests are politely phrased.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iQA/ AwUBRgWNLAc1ZuHjbNh8EQKxagCgn3HbncO+n0wb
Ee5sGM4fM4k/C1wAoJ9X
gVQ7IH+9s5fVh7rOfmiXLBDv
=vvEK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
for abuse and hashcash info.

Fritz Wuehler

2007-03-24, 7:12 pm

Anonymous Sender wrote:

> To get back to the topic, this group is the main group for
> discussions of anonymous software, as far as I know. If you want to
> promote anonymity, you probably want newcomers to be able to ask
> questions here and get help.

They can, and they do. You whining about people being "insulting" is
nothing but a statement of dissatisfaction with the wholly natural
responses your own self righteous attitude demands. Ignorant users
aren't the problem here guy, you are. You ask stupid questions and make
stupid assertions ad nauseam, then get all pantie bunched when folk
don't pat your little behind and say nice things.

Get over yourself already. Sit down, shut the hell up unless you have
an intelligent question, and you may just learn the things you're
bitching about people not being able to learn here.

Anonymous

2007-03-25, 1:15 am

Anonyma

2007-03-25, 1:15 am

In article <666edafffa3f918a035bee33714f8ab2@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>
Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-200703.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
>
> Anonymous Sender wrote:
>
>
> They can, and they do. You whining about people being "insulting" is
> nothing but a statement of dissatisfaction with the wholly natural
> responses your own self righteous attitude demands.

Yep, and it can't be long before he starts complaining that everyone
but him is an insane child and invokes his "if you lay down with lice
you get licey" crap.

It's a bit like one of those records that goes on an endless loop.
Whether you come in to this newsgroup in the year 2000 or the year
2007, it's the exact same words being spewed from eelbash's mouth.

Maybe he's actually a robot like Eliza and we're talking to a machine.

Anonymous

2007-03-31, 1:14 am