Re: [tor-talk] Illegal Activity As A Metric of Tor Security and Anonymity

[Juan <juan.g71@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 13:48:27 -0700
coderman <coderman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Juan <juan.g71@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >...
> >         And so we have amusing tor lackeys like ¨coderman¨
> >         parroting propaganda that not even the tor developers
> >         themselves believe.
> 
> this is amusing! explain to me where i've said Tor resists traffic
> analysis? :)

	As I already mentioned,  you and others talk as if that were the
	case. As a matter of fact you are doing it again in this 
	(previous) message of yours.

> 
> my point is that Tor is harder than the software you're using over it.

	That is just a generality, a half truth, and not relevant in
	this context.  It is an excuse and a distraction.


> web browsers, instant messaging clients, web services and poorly
> implemented applications.
> 
> why do you need traffic analysis when trivial attacks work just as
> well?

	I dont need traffic analysis, I am not a government nazi. 

	However,  government nazis do need traffic analysis to
	deal with people who correctly configure their servers.

	It shouldnt be necessary for me to point out such obvious
	fact? 

	Also, if attacks against  servers are ´easy´,
	why did it take years for the government  to get freedom
	hosting? 

> 
> 
> 
> >         So, how did the american gestapo get freedom hosting and
> > silk road? Traffic analysis.
> 
> citation needed.  all signs point to insider threat (you know, rats)


	Citation needed? What kind of citation? I make my case based on
	basic, correct reasoning and public information. And you have
	nothing to counter it. 

	And what are *you* doing? Are you indeed parroting the
	official story? Are you that ´naive´? 

	> all signs point to insider threat (you know, rats)

	So, wheres **your** evidence for that parallel story? 


> 
> 
> 
> >         https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
> 
> we could have a long discussion on this subject, but not apropos to
> this list...

	What? You dont want to discuss how fuckingly corrupt the US
	government is in a list that belongs to the US government? 

	You dont want to discuss the fact that the american ´justice´
	system is based on blatant lies and that they even have a
	procedure in place to manage those blatant lies?

	tsk tsk tsk 
	
	And, au contraire, the discussion is 100% a propos this mailing
	list. 

	See, you are basing your baseless defence of Tor (US
	military project)  on lies from the US government, lies which in
	turn can be traced to so called ¨parallel contstruction¨.

	
> 
> 
> best regards,
> 
> 
> 
> TL;DR:  Tor is not the weak spot in your privacy. 


	Baseless assertion.


> OPSEC, application
> attack surface, pervasive information insecurity - these are all going
> to betray you before some fundamental vulnerability in Tor protocol.


	False, baseless assertion. Notice again  how you fail to
	specify the ´threat model´, to use your military jargon.

	You are not explicitly saying that tor resists traffic
	analysis, but you are saying something that amounts to the same
	thing - that traffic analysis doesnt matter.




J.

-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk