You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 5, 2019. It is now read-only.
While there's nothing wrong with a Tor bridge having an URL, and while fte sometimes did have URLs in some actual deployments… perhaps we could try to avoid making it so easy to spam the bridge_reachability test results?
¹ The Chokepoint Project devs said it was someone operating a probe from Canada, and that the report this came from was bridge_reachability-2015-04-03T183901Z-AS812-probe.yamloo, but that report now strangely doesn't exist in http://pipeline.infra.ooni.nu/CA/ (!!).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It seems that someone¹ ran ooni-probe's bridge_reachability test with an input list of a bunch of pastebin and source code/git hosting sites. This caused the charts on https://beta.chokepointproject.net/measurements/tor-bridge-reachability#Bridge_explorer to have a bunch of URLs in the "bridge select" dropdown.
While there's nothing wrong with a Tor bridge having an URL, and while fte sometimes did have URLs in some actual deployments… perhaps we could try to avoid making it so easy to spam the bridge_reachability test results?
¹ The Chokepoint Project devs said it was someone operating a probe from Canada, and that the report this came from was
bridge_reachability-2015-04-03T183901Z-AS812-probe.yamloo
, but that report now strangely doesn't exist in http://pipeline.infra.ooni.nu/CA/ (!!).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: