0

Is it because of the nature of it's encryption protocol? I'm assuming there are other reasons as well, but I have not been able to find any information about it.

1

1 Answer 1

-1

Basically it's about the main difference between TCP and UDP - udp packets are fire-and-forget ones, but tcp's are much more strict and simple to handle. The working with UDP as a transport for Tor itself has it's uses, but I'm sure that it will be implemented in a future: there're too many bonuses in doing so that it simply can be ignored. If you want to transport UDP for your hidden service, for example, - just use OpenVPN! TCP was the "first and most universal/wide" choice, and it's better implement a single feature, but good - rather than ten of them, but badly: we've seen the Microsoft approach on features, it stinks :)

IMHO: - this is my very personal opinion:

  • Privacy concerns in Tor FAQ about non-tcp packets revealing OS are ridiculous, this can be handled "not so hard"
  • The "DNS resolver excuse" is an issue that must be fixed regardless of IP support, even if it will be still just TCP only supported
3
  • 1
    "Privacy concerns in Tor FAQ about non-tcp packets revealing OS are ridiculous, this can be handled "not so hard"" <- Dunning-Kruger in action.
    – cacahuatl
    Dec 17, 2016 at 16:51
  • Also you're wrong re the difference between tcp/udp in that respect but you already demonstrated you don't understand that aspect of networking in previous answers.
    – cacahuatl
    Dec 17, 2016 at 16:55
  • @canonizingironize You should clarify yourself a word "basically" - just to stop sounding like a joke, man :) Pehaps you're better cool down and actually read and try to understand what I mean in a whole answer, not cherrypicking a separate words and sentences out-of-context. Thanks!
    – Alexey Vesnin
    Dec 18, 2016 at 2:07

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .