search

oxen-io / session-pysogs

Python implementation of the Session community server
GNU General Public License v3.0
74 stars 33 forks source link

Can I host this on an onion domain? #108

Open AlexanderEpolite opened 2 years ago

AlexanderEpolite commented 2 years ago

i'm using sogs proxy and i cannot seem to get a server running a .onion domain to work. the website lists the room directory, but when i click on a room it shows a blank page. if i get the url to join manually and enter it into session, it says "Couldn't join group".

is it possible to do this? using nginx with the default sogs proxy setup.

jagerman commented 2 years ago

I'm afraid that setup won't work with current Session because of how onion requests work: the request bounces through the Oxen network, then the last hop is responsible for resolving the SOGS address and sending the request to it (and then relaying the response back). Because that last hop is a random service node, it's very unlikely that .onion resolution will work (unless the node just happens to have working Tor connectivity).

We have some plans to support direct Lokinet connections in Session later this year; at that point it might be easier to make Session also recognize .onion domains (but I am not a Session dev, and this is pure speculation on my part).

Cc @mpretty-cyro for comments.

AlexanderEpolite commented 2 years ago

alright, thank you! would be good to have this so you can have an anonymous open group.

majestrate commented 2 years ago

supporting .onion would require all session clients to have a tor client and such is highly unlikely to happen as we have been dragging our feet to get lokinet in already which is higher priority than tor. once lokinet is in there will be no reason to have accessibility to .onion anyways as we provide a functionally equivalent (arguably superior) kind of connectivity to .onion with .loki.

jagerman commented 2 years ago

supporting .onion would require all session clients to have a tor client

I was thinking that it would be opt-in support: i.e. in order to access one you need to set up a Tor client yourself and get it working (which is much less than the embedded lokinet support we plan to have).

But I agree that lokinet support is more important and will be a better experience.

SamsungGalaxyPlayer commented 9 months ago

Did Lokinet support materialize for this?