Suggest Trustworthy Tor Hidden Services as Time Sources for sdwdate

[Patrick]

@HulaHoop

@nurmagoz

That discussion is meaningless to this thread. ctemplare will be kept as it is.

I disagree. Very relevant since we don’t allow services by anonymous operators for liability reasons. I think the opinion of the privacyIO dev is important to re-read here:

The reason being we do not like to provide information which cannot be verified by public sources. We don’t allow anonymous companies to provide services because it involves people trusting an unknown entity with their data that cannot be verified. If the company fails or does something disastrous there is no recourse.

To add CTemplar we would have to relax/remove our trust requirements. If we did this, we’d have all sorts of services recommended (we actually put that requirement in place to ward against people recommending random unknown .onion service email providers).

We won’t be signing any NDAs regarding this, as it would mean we cannot reveal what we learn, and thus puts it on the community to trust us instead of the company they’re doing business with.

That discussion belongs there:
sdwdate Time Sources Criteria - #2 by Patrick

Will quote there.

@Perestroika

I suggest lowering the request timeout threshold, so sdwdate does not hang for long times on broken links.

That belongs here: sdwdate Time Sources Criteria and/or sdwdate and sdwdate-gui development thread.