# V3 Tor addresses are more than 56 digits

**URL:** <https://onlykey.discourse.group/t/v3-tor-addresses-are-more-than-56-digits/409>\
**Category:** Feature Requests\
**Created:** [June 2, 2021, 3:51pm UTC](https://onlykey.discourse.group/t/v3-tor-addresses-are-more-than-56-digits/409 "2021-06-02T15:51:25Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![benzen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/5f8ce5/32.png) [@benzen](https://onlykey.discourse.group/u/benzen)\
**Post date:** [June 2, 2021, 3:51pm UTC](https://onlykey.discourse.group/t/v3-tor-addresses-are-more-than-56-digits/409/1 "2021-06-02T15:51:25Z")

</div>

It is not possible to reach a v3 .onion page with only key, with 56 digits it misses exactly the .onion in the end.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![t11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8e7dd6/32.png) [@t11](https://onlykey.discourse.group/u/t11)\
**Post date:** [June 3, 2021, 1:38pm UTC](https://onlykey.discourse.group/t/v3-tor-addresses-are-more-than-56-digits/409/2 "2021-06-03T13:38:20Z")

</div>

Interesting, how common are v3 addresses I have not seen many of those? A possible workaround would be to put the TOR address into the username field with the .onion in the password field. You could also use options listed here - [OnlyKey User's Guide | Docs](https://docs.crp.to/usersguide.html#sysadmin-mode)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![benzen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/5f8ce5/32.png) [@benzen](https://onlykey.discourse.group/u/benzen)\
**Post date:** [June 3, 2021, 2:00pm UTC](https://onlykey.discourse.group/t/v3-tor-addresses-are-more-than-56-digits/409/3 "2021-06-03T14:00:13Z")

</div>

Yes, thanks, I am playing around with the advanced options now.  
Selfhosting of services does make use of v3 a lot.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mango\_Mungo](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/onlykey.discourse.group/mango_mungo/32/26_2.png) [@Mango\_Mungo](https://onlykey.discourse.group/u/Mango_Mungo)\
**Post date:** [July 31, 2021, 8:09pm UTC](https://onlykey.discourse.group/t/v3-tor-addresses-are-more-than-56-digits/409/4 "2021-07-31T20:09:07Z")

</div>

> [@t11](#):
>
> how common are v3 addresses

Very common 😅 v2 will be deactivated in a few weeks. I only have v3 hidden services. [Onion Service version 2 deprecation timeline](https://blog.torproject.org/v2-deprecation-timeline)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![hByW5bQctXJB6X](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/9d8465/32.png) [@hByW5bQctXJB6X](https://onlykey.discourse.group/u/hByW5bQctXJB6X)\
**Post date:** [August 23, 2021, 9:00am UTC](https://onlykey.discourse.group/t/v3-tor-addresses-are-more-than-56-digits/409/5 "2021-08-23T09:00:22Z")

</div>

This really should be looked into.

The 56 Character limit on field entries is too restrictive, increasing this to 128 or 256 characters at the expense of slightly increased encryption/decryption time is a worthwhile tradeoff in my personal opinion.

I say this as increasing this character limit would allow for the OnlyKey to be used against many URL’s of an extended length without the need for potentially invasive link shortners outside of the OnlyKey platform itself.

Perhaps an option to choose a maximum character length either during intial setup OR from the advanced options menu, up to say 512 characters (if possible) would be the best way of handling this?  
Providing a note stating that increasing the character length would increase encryption & decryption times with the OnlyKey as the trade-off in such a scenario (Plus any other tradeoffs that may come with it).