Alec Muffett: > Irregardless of the political and privacy issues there are also technical >> benefits to using Tor for day to day traffic. > > > Totally. So many people are fixated on "anonymity" and completely ignore > the end-to-end nature of Onion addressing, for instance. > > It's a fantastic enabler of high-integrity communications. I'm curious what the advantage is in this respect of .onion compared to using TLS with manual fingerprint verification. My best guess is that .onion has better usability today with current tools. But it seems to me that it wouldn't be incredibly hard to produce a SOCKS proxy to support a ".tlsexplicit" TLD where the SOCKS proxy drops the connection to "www.google.com.<fingerprint>.tlsexplicit" if the server doesn't present a TLS cert that matches <fingerprint>. If we accept as a premise that location-anonymity isn't desired, and that all we want is the integrity/authencitity/encryption properties that .onion gives you, wouldn't .tlsexplicit be a lot more efficient and a lot less complex? Cheers, -Jeremy Rand
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 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