4 ms·
This may not be the whole solution but it is a step in the right direction. Kudos to NYT for attention to this subset of readers.
by jameskegel 9y ago
This may not be the whole solution but it is a step in the right direction. Kudos to NYT for attention to this subset of readers.
- belorn 9y agoIt is. Overlay networks has a very expensive overhead, but it is one of the few ways that networks can be updated to modern views on security threats and privacy without getting ISP to change their hardware and software. I am in particular hopeful that we might see a future where tor will simply be a available tool in the general network stack, enabling private end-to-end without exist nodes.
- jerheinze 9y ago> Overlay networks has a very expensive overhead Single onion services are a thing now for quiet some time actually: https://web.archive.org/web/20161219230314/https://blog.torproject.org/blog/whats-new-tor-0298 https://web.archive.org/web/20161219230314/https://blog.torp... (had to use archive.org since images are broken on their blog currently)
- ryanlol 9y agoWhy is this a step in the right direction? Having a .onion service provides essentially zero benefit without a hidden backend. People wanting to access NYT site via Tor, can just navigate to https://www.nytimes.com/ https://www.nytimes.com/ and it'll be significantly faster than the .onion equivalent.
- jerheinze 9y ago> People wanting to access NYT site via Tor, can just navigate to https://www.nytimes.com/ https://www.nytimes.com/ and it'll be significantly faster than the .onion equivalent. This isn't true, exits are currently in short supply. And onion services don't use exits, so it will result in a faster speed, especially since they may have made it as a single onion service[1]. [1] : https://web.archive.org/web/20161219230314/https://blog.torproject.org/blog/whats-new-tor-0298 https://web.archive.org/web/20161219230314/https://blog.torp...