Changing IP address to access public website ruled violation of US law

True. However, using VPN services to access US media sites from outside the US is pretty common, no?

 

Of course there will be ways to get around IPV6. I know for sure they will be a lot harder to implement and keep working.

 

voldermort@riseup.net

 

Thanks, voldermort

More generally, I'm very interested in ways for Tor and VPNs to play well together. I may have more to say here. But y'all can follow my ravings on <-http://tor.stackexchange.com->

 

You're quite active there. I've been lurking there and have made a couple posts. Not too fond of the format they use. There's a few there posting some bad info regarding exit nodes, exaggerating the risks, scaring people away from running them. Probably another one of those nefarious cats.

 

I've never been very fond of StackExchange either. I don't like the format, with questions and answers being voted around. But it seemed like the best shot for a Tor support forum, so I decided to participate. I'm sure that all my talk of VPNs upsets at least some there, but hey

Regarding exit nodes, one user did write some over-the-top stuff. But his answer has been voted down.

 

Just FYI, I have two Whonix instances connected by eight VPN tunnels via Tor:

Code:

Whonix-Workstation-1         Whonix-Gateway-1        Whonix-Gateway-2      Whonix-Workstation-2

tun0 :: openvpn-server-0 <-> hidden-service-0  <-->  Tor-socksport-0  <->  openvpn-client-0 :: tun0
....    ................     ................        ...............       ................
tun7 :: openvpn-server-7 <-> hidden-service-7  <-->  Tor-socksport-7  <->  openvpn-client-7 :: tun7

Any bets on how many I can bond in a useful way with ifenslave?

 

Phone call to NSA,
Hello, could you trace this connection? I got lost.

 

Ha ha

Well, so far it's zero

I have a bond0 with eight slaves, and they all seem active, but ping fails Before bonding, I can ping through all eight, with 1-2 second latency.

Maybe ifenslave can't deal with Tor's 1-2 second latency.

PS: It's quite simple. One can run an openvpn server as a hidden service, so the VPN tunnel (in TCP mode) connects through Tor. The goal is aggregating a bunch of those low-bandwidth connections into one high-bandwidth connection

 

Sry, I couldn't resist.

I think I misread what you were doing here. At first glance, I thought you were chaining them. Am I reading this correctly now? You're attempting to split the traffic and recombine it?

 

Yep

Crazy, isn't it?

I found this <-http://simonmott.co.uk/vpn-bonding-> claiming that SSH tunnels over connections via different ISP could be bonded in balance-rr mode with ifenslave.

But it's a big jump from bonding SSH tun interfaces to VPN-via-Tor tun interfaces

Wouldn't it be cool to get 10-20 Mbps through Tor?

 

I bit like this idea?

Ya it would. I think you'd have to divide and add separate routing instructions for each stream to get it to use more than one route. The streams would also have to contain timing packets or include some type of sequencing data to get them recombined in the correct order. Would require major changes on both the entry points and the exits to keep them all in sync with each other. The whole thing would need a lot of buffering ability if one branch was slower or less consistent than the others.

 

I thought that ifenslave and/or applications handled all that