Delivery-Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 03:01:51 -0500
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=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID
	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 9E01B1E041B;
	Mon,  3 Nov 2014 03:01:49 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 978013161A;
	Mon,  3 Nov 2014 08:01:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E656630EFF
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon,  3 Nov 2014 08:01:41 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at 
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 uIjK6Mmh_2un for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Mon,  3 Nov 2014 08:01:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-la0-x233.google.com (mail-la0-x233.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::233])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C63430CF3
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon,  3 Nov 2014 08:01:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id q1so8923952lam.24
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 03 Nov 2014 00:01:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
 :cc:content-type;
 bh=0SuKy7w3858eg8G0DqEz924nxqwTBCXwa7enxSYDgcw=;
 b=GcK5AWc4LRpA/CTiMYD/RPVgOvC+/1psEpRhDWSNlefKbBWWBArrTTW4uwWJdhjwN9
 k12I7IU0fojBMvEyDiv/rvfJavkstbx2xbwJEJICy9Am7ThQNdCSs4fq6v2Sp3bwK+PP
 R45GJWN0i/IcQgENBWE/K41AGf67Cvd7tVbtrxtUOsfp8p93dFDkkkY1HK8AWz1UrAUC
 wdTANhJ3nMw89x4ya7dnO12wCjXk+GONnO98mEOFbxsVOLbLDSYTCIokn0WtoREQkSpR
 tLY166kmQ4qzVvn9oqlzgPJfbNRjseiFLV+0GacoSEHjbrQHIqjTuV2Ne/zJk1lD6ln6
 R20A==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.169.106 with SMTP id ad10mr48844585lbc.13.1415001697941; 
 Mon, 03 Nov 2014 00:01:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.112.156.225 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Nov 2014 00:01:37 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <2183030.0TfTSMp6Az@ncpws04>
References: <7488606.2oxgLGVBPl@ncpws04> <1943762.342hlgev77@ncpws04>
 <CAJVRA1SvtJ8-Vpz3RPqnQEjG-XMuTMoYpNigDeUso8=piS_bVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2183030.0TfTSMp6Az@ncpws04>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 00:01:37 -0800
Message-ID: <CAJVRA1R=RY1MFM=5m4ZGaeK3Jmrvx7dxsL37ot-htqxawC+PCw@mail.gmail.com>
From: coderman <coderman@gmail.com>
To: Lars Boegild Thomsen <lth@reclaim-your-privacy.com>
Cc: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Cloak Tor Router
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>

On 11/2/14, Lars Boegild Thomsen <lth@reclaim-your-privacy.com> wrote:
> ...
> In the case of a standard Cloak (as least as it is envisioned right now)
> that is not a problem for Cloak then.  Cloak _will_ be the Wireless Access
> Point, it will enforce client isolation at Wi-Fi level and it will hand out
> separate address to each client.
>
> Hey - one challenge down :)

agreed.  i mention this because the way i usually use transparent
proxy mode is as mentioned above:  a local wifi router connected to
transparent Tor proxy connected to ISP.

in this situation, all the clients are behind the NAT WiFi router,
which complicated isolation.

if you _are_ the WiFi access point, as you intend to be, then there is
no NAT, and you avoid this issue.  (perhaps note to end-user: best to
connect clients directly to Cloak, rather than a router to Cloak :)


thank you for your prompt responses and attention to these details!


best regards,
-- 
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

