Upside: Dodges nearly all forms of NAT and most content filters so long as the server's Tor Browser is set to use only port 443. You can just pop it open in any random coffee shop and get busy.
I would love to see an upload feature for the client so that the remote users can return files to the server.
(1) You can help fix this. If you plan to make use of a service like this, please consider running a relay node at the same time. This is not risky like running an exit and directly helps services like this run better.
Please don't, or if you do, host the relay node from a completely different connection.
Onion sites are not completely hidden, and uptime times can be correlated to know which ip is running which hidden service [1], completely missing the point of hidden services.
True. "At the same time" was a poor choice of words. I was thinking more along the lines of if you are going to use something like this regularly, especially to move files of considerable size, consider giving back.
It's actually not even smart to run tor support services on the same subnet as tor users.
Running a relay might not be risky in the same ways as running an exit, but be aware your relay's ip can still find its way onto various blacklists just by virtue of being associated with tor. It's probably good to clear this use with whoever runs your network before setting it up.
Upside: Dodges nearly all forms of NAT and most content filters so long as the server's Tor Browser is set to use only port 443. You can just pop it open in any random coffee shop and get busy.
I would love to see an upload feature for the client so that the remote users can return files to the server.
(1) You can help fix this. If you plan to make use of a service like this, please consider running a relay node at the same time. This is not risky like running an exit and directly helps services like this run better.