📅 Original date posted:2014-07-07
📝 Original message:Wait, I thought SOCKS4 was supposed to help somehow in terms of prevention
of leaking of information?
Or maybe I am misremembering. Here's what I'm thinking of...
1) https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/Preventing_Tor_DNS_Leaks
2) More regarding TOR,
"
I keep seeing these warnings about SOCKS and DNS information leaks. Should
I worry?
The warning is:
Your application (using socks5 on port %d) is giving Tor only an IP
address. Applications that do DNS resolves themselves may leak
information. Consider using Socks4A (e.g. via Polipo or socat) instead.
https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq#WarningsAboutSOCKSandDNSInformationLeaks
I'm not sure that means I'm screaming fire or anything, but isn't there
some good reason for SOCKS4 and SOCKS4A?
Or maybe another way to ask this is: Looking at an example in which
someone is running Tor, Privoxy, I2P, and FoxyProxy together while running
Bitcoin Core, would there be a problem with having a setting for SOCKS4A
for traffic in such a setup given the changes proposed to remove SOCKS4 as
suggested in bitcoin-development?
Probably there is just a simple answer to that last question, like "no."
But I thought I'd ask.
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Wladimir <laanwj at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If no one screams fire, we plan on removing support for it in the next
>> major release, for two reasons:
>>
>> - It would remove some crufty, hardly tested code paths
>>
>> - SOCKS5 offers better privacy as it allows DNS redirection
>
> Another one:
>
> - SOCKS5 supports IPv6
>
> Last call...
>
> Wladimir
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse
> Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community
> Edition
> Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows
> Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
Odinn Cyberguerrilla [ARCHIVE] /
npub18x…hg6zk
2023-06-07 15:23:32
in reply to nevent1q…ky7e
Author Public Key
npub18xqykhf26udeq2nyk98ee0a5q4w3s2f75m405a6zswpdy573lxeqmhg6zkPublished at
2023-06-07 15:23:32Event JSON
{
"id": "13a2da6eed9cedc097f3e0971cd7154b024d48c4b0b8fdd748612313459aa586",
"pubkey": "39804b5d2ad71b902a64b14f9cbfb4055d18293ea6eafa77428382d253d1f9b2",
"created_at": 1686151412,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"0a193054b7b315795a0878206820d5c8020db3b57c9a83c32edc4ac296de6f59",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"02d28cce979cadf2752d8ae00866e7ebef9c54d8ef4246e5ccceb7dd329a16ed",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"50ece7cbb2dc316af1cd5da0d62e0e1fec40f20919242c8fbedd53702fba95db"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-07-07\n📝 Original message:Wait, I thought SOCKS4 was supposed to help somehow in terms of prevention\nof leaking of information?\n\nOr maybe I am misremembering. Here's what I'm thinking of...\n1) https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/Preventing_Tor_DNS_Leaks\n\n2) More regarding TOR,\n\"\n\nI keep seeing these warnings about SOCKS and DNS information leaks. Should\nI worry?\n\nThe warning is:\n\nYour application (using socks5 on port %d) is giving Tor only an IP\naddress. Applications that do DNS resolves themselves may leak\ninformation. Consider using Socks4A (e.g. via Polipo or socat) instead.\n\nhttps://www.torproject.org/docs/faq#WarningsAboutSOCKSandDNSInformationLeaks\n\nI'm not sure that means I'm screaming fire or anything, but isn't there\nsome good reason for SOCKS4 and SOCKS4A?\nOr maybe another way to ask this is: Looking at an example in which\nsomeone is running Tor, Privoxy, I2P, and FoxyProxy together while running\nBitcoin Core, would there be a problem with having a setting for SOCKS4A\nfor traffic in such a setup given the changes proposed to remove SOCKS4 as\nsuggested in bitcoin-development?\n\nProbably there is just a simple answer to that last question, like \"no.\"\nBut I thought I'd ask.\n\n\u003e On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Wladimir \u003claanwj at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e If no one screams fire, we plan on removing support for it in the next\n\u003e\u003e major release, for two reasons:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e - It would remove some crufty, hardly tested code paths\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e - SOCKS5 offers better privacy as it allows DNS redirection\n\u003e\n\u003e Another one:\n\u003e\n\u003e - SOCKS5 supports IPv6\n\u003e\n\u003e Last call...\n\u003e\n\u003e Wladimir\n\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse\n\u003e Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community\n\u003e Edition\n\u003e Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows\n\u003e Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards\n\u003e http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e",
"sig": "2657593430ad34d4b5be41205d47413700d744c815e64757f0c32b59be8d04c6da1c335b6a9981e4cb88a239f4dae70c4f373e6bc3d214db13dc4ec427cf9da9"
}