~dr|z3d
@RN
@RN_
@StormyCloud
@T3s|4
@T3s|4_
@eyedeekay
@orignal
@postman
@zzz
%ardu
%cumlord
%mareki2p
+FreefallHeavens
+Onn4l7h
+Onn4|7h
+Over
+Rogueone
+Sh0ck
+Xeha
+hk
+onon_
+profetikla
+qend-irc2p
+r00tobo_BNC
+romer
+uop23ip
+waffles
+xHarr
Arch
BravoOreo
BubbRubb1
C341
Danny
FreeB
Irc2PGuest52770
Irc2PGuest75891
Irc2PGuest77400
Irc2PGuest82629
Irc2PGuest82806
Liorar_
Meow
acetone_
aisle1
anontor
halloy13412
maylay
moe
nilbog-
nnm--
not_bob_afk
pisslord
poriori_
pory
r00tobo[2]
shiver_
sidereal
simprelay
solidx66
thetia
u5657
weko_
wew-
zer0bitz
obscuratus
What's the rationale for forbidding the use of client tunnels for Database searches?
eyedeekay
TBH with you obscuratus I don't know it offhand
obscuratus
It look's like I2PD made a change recently that eliminates them. I was wondering if we should follow.
obscuratus
You can use exploratory tunnels instead, and then eliminate having to do safety and security checks for Database messages in client tunnels.
obscuratus
Just don't do Database messages in client tunnels. Exploratory only.
obscuratus
But, there's always tradeoffs. :)
eyedeekay
Yeah it's worth analyzing while we have the time
obscuratus
One drawback I see is that users may not realize there are anonymity consequences to changing the number of hops in your exploratory tunnels.
obscuratus
If nothing else, is has me curious to change it to exploratory, and see how many Database related messages I still get down my client tunnels.
obscuratus
I shouldn't get any if I'm not making any DSM queries on my client tunnels.
xeiaso
The more code I read the less I understand.
xeiaso
If you shouldn't be able to deduce that two destinations are hosted on the same router, then why do destination share the exploratory tunnel pool?