Delivery-Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:02:14 -0400
Return-Path: <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on moria.seul.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,
	RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Original-To: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-To: archiver@seul.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (eugeni.torproject.org [38.229.72.13])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by khazad-dum.seul.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 167A51E0BB0;
	Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:02:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7689C307E6;
	Mon, 11 Aug 2014 18:02:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A091307B0
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 18:02:05 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eugeni.torproject.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (eugeni.torproject.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id GXZ27cJa9s1J for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Mon, 11 Aug 2014 18:02:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from cc-smtpout3.netcologne.de (cc-smtpout3.netcologne.de
 [89.1.8.213])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA36026608
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 18:02:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from cc-smtpin2.netcologne.de (cc-smtpin2.netcologne.de [89.1.8.202])
 by cc-smtpout3.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 908AA122EB
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 19:43:44 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by cc-smtpin2.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CFB411DFF
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 19:43:44 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.224.19.209] (helo=cc-smtpin2.netcologne.de)
 by localhost with ESMTP (eXpurgate 4.0.2)
 (envelope-from <thomas.hluchnik@netcologne.de>)
 id 53e900d0-0d1f-7f0000012729-7f000001bb14-1
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 19:43:44 +0200
Received: from [10.0.2.15] (g224019209.adsl.alicedsl.de [92.224.19.209])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by cc-smtpin2.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 19:43:43 +0200 (CEST)
From: thomas.hluchnik@netcologne.de
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 19:43:34 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <201408111943.34419.thomas.hluchnik@netcologne.de>
Subject: [tor-talk] HS again: Portscan?
X-BeenThere: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
List-Id: "all discussion about theory, design,
 and development of Onion Routing" <tor-talk.lists.torproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/>
List-Post: <mailto:tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org
Sender: "tor-talk" <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>

Hello everybody,

have a question. These days, there were discussions about scanning the TOR universum for hidden server which would mean 2^80 possible hidden server. So lets assume they try one specific HS which is existing. How can they determine it's existence? I would guess by trying port 80 and maybe port 443. But what if the HS owner decides to run his service over port 389 for example? For clarification, that's what I mean:

HidenServicePort 389 127.0.0.1:80

This would require using URL with http://$onion.onion:389/

Does this help making a HS more invisible? Would this require a surveiller scanning not only all 2^80 onions but also all 2^16 possible ports?

Regards

Thomas
-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

