Why don't they provide MD5, SHA-1 or SHA-2 hash for Tor?
>>53658014
literal botnet
>>53658081
Well, I just want the hashes to check the file. Everyone has a hash generator on their PC (even 7zip provides this functionality) but who the fuck has that crap 'GnuPG ' installed to check their signature nonsense?
>>53658081
Also I don't care if botnet or not, I just used it to spam anti-mudslime propaganda in the comments section of a site :^)
>>53658014
they do provide the PGP key;
https://dist.torproject.org/torbrowser/5.5.4/torbrowser-install-5.5.4_en-US.exe.asc
>>53658121
Yeah but
>Everyone has a hash generator on their PC (even 7zip provides this functionality) but who the fuck has that crap 'GnuPG ' installed to check their signature nonsense? >>53658101
>>53658101
>>53658129
>1458821010
>Still not using GnuPG
>>53658714
>4MB installer (GNUPG)
vs
>100KB portable program (WinHasher)
>>53658014
>MD5
>SHA-1
Seriously, lad?
>SHA-2
They sign their packages using their public PGP key. There's hardly a need for a separate SHA-2 hash once you can establish a web of trust.
>>53658778
With the current areal densities this is no cause for concern. Please stop using floppy drives, grandpa.
>>53658800
> you have enough space so you should use bloatware
(You)
>>53658812
>GnuPG
>bloat
>>53658833
>4MB
>to check a fucking signature
>not bloat
>>53658101
>Everyone has a hash generator on their PC
...apart from wincucks that have to use external programs
>even 7zip provides this functionality
oh
>but who the fuck has that crap 'GnuPG ' installed to check their signature nonsense?
so you want to browse the web safely yet you don't want to browse the web safely
I suggest fucking off with whatever retarded shit you want to do because tor is clearly not the solution to your "problem"
>>53658853
>checking a signature is all that GnuPG is used for.
>>53658867
Besides that is it that hard to provide a fucking SHA-2 hash?
>>53658901
>buy a swiss knife, even though you just need a bottle opener
>>53658014
> (sig)
you fucking mongoloid nigger
>>53658925
>Not seeing the need for having a Swiss knife.
