[or-cvs] r21441: {projects} tighten up the first third, thanks to karen (projects/articles)

[Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Author: arma
Date: 2010-01-18 23:46:31 +0000 (Mon, 18 Jan 2010)
New Revision: 21441

Modified:
   projects/articles/circumvention-features.txt
Log:
tighten up the first third, thanks to karen


Modified: projects/articles/circumvention-features.txt
===================================================================
--- projects/articles/circumvention-features.txt	2010-01-18 23:23:07 UTC (rev 21440)
+++ projects/articles/circumvention-features.txt	2010-01-18 23:46:31 UTC (rev 21441)
@@ -1,13 +1,12 @@
 
 "Ten things to look for in tools that circumvent Internet censorship"
 
-As more countries crack down on Internet use by filtering connections
-to sensitive websites, people around the world are increasingly turning
-to anti-censorship software, also known as circumvention tools. A wide
-variety of tools have been built to answer this threat by letting people
-get to websites they otherwise can't reach. But different tools provide
-different features and different levels of security, and it's hard for
-users to understand the tradeoffs.
+As more countries crack down on Internet use, people around the world
+are turning to anti-censorship software that lets them reach blocked
+websites. Many types of software, also known as circumvention tools,
+have been created to answer the threat to freedom online. These tools
+provide different features and levels of security, and it's important
+for users to understand the tradeoffs.
 
 This article lays out ten features you should consider when evaluating
 a circumvention tool. The goal isn't to advocate for any specific tool,
@@ -37,7 +36,7 @@
 if you're using an open proxy, the process of using the proxy is
 straightforward: you configure your web browser or other application
 to use the proxy. The big challenge for open proxy users is finding an
-open proxy that's reliable and fast. On the other hand, other tools have
+open proxy that's reliable and fast. On the other hand, some tools have
 much more sophisticated relaying components, made up of multiple proxies,
 multiple layers of encryption, and so on.
 
@@ -45,23 +44,20 @@
 
 One of the first questions you should ask when looking at a circumvention
 tool is who else uses it. A wide variety of users means that if somebody
-finds out you're one of the users, they can't conclude much about why
-you're using it, or what sort of person you are.
+finds out you are using the software, they can't conclude much about
+why you're using it. A privacy tool like Tor has many different classes
+of users around the world (ranging from ordinary people and and human
+rights activists to corporations, law enforcement, and militaries) so
+the fact that you have Tor installed doesn't give people much additional
+information about who you are or what sorts of sites you might visit. On
+the other hand, imagine a group of Iranian bloggers using a circumvention
+tool created just for them. If anybody discovers that one of them is
+using it, they can easily guess why.
 
-At one extreme, imagine a hypothetical circumvention tool given out only
-to a select group of Iranian bloggers. If anybody discovers that you're
-using it, they can guess who are you and what you're doing with it. At
-the other extreme, a privacy tool like Tor has many different classes
-of users around the world (ranging from ordinary people, civil rights
-enthusiasts, and human rights activists to corporations, law enforcement,
-and militaries) so the fact that you have Tor installed doesn't give
-people much additional information about who you are or what sorts of
-sites you might visit.
-
-Beyond technical features that make a given tool useful to a narrow
-audience or a more broad audience, marketing plays a big role in which
-users show up. A lot of tools spread through word of mouth, so if the
-first few users are in Vietnam and they find it useful, the next set of
+Beyond technical features that make a given tool useful to a few people
+in one country or people all over the world, marketing plays a big role
+in which users show up. A lot of tools spread through word of mouth, so
+if the first few users are in Vietnam and they find it useful, the next
 users will tend to be from Vietnam too. Whether a tool is translated
 into some languages but not others can also direct (or hamper) which
 users it will attract.
@@ -81,46 +77,46 @@
 case of Ultrasurf recently, Iran). On the one hand, this strategy makes
 sense in terms of limiting the bandwidth costs. But on the other hand,
 if you're in Saudi Arabia and need a circumvention tool, some otherwise
-useful tools are simply not an option for you.
+useful tools are not an option for you.
 
 3. Sustainable network and software development
 
 If you're going to invest the time to figure out how to use a given tool,
-you want to make sure it's going to be around for a while. Different
-tools take different approaches to ensuring their long-term existence.
-The main three approaches are through volunteers, through profit, and
-through sponsors.
+you want to make sure it's going to be around for a while. There are
+several ways that different tools ensure their long-term existence.
+The main three approaches are the use of volunteers, making a profit,
+and getting funds from sponsors.
 
 Networks like Tor rely on volunteers to provide the relays that make
 up the network. Thousands of people around the world have computers
 with good network connections and want to help make the world a better
-place. By joining them into one big network, Tor ensures that the network
-is independent from the entity writing the software; so the network will
-be around down the road even if the Tor Project as an entity ceases
-to exist. Psiphon (psiphon.ca), by contrast, is taking the for-profit
-approach of collecting money for service. They reason that if they can
-create a profitable company, then that company will be able to fund all
-of their costs (including the network) on an ongoing basis. The third
-approach is to rely on sponsors to pay for the bandwidth costs. The
-Java Anon Proxy or JAP project (anon.inf.tu-dresden.de/index_en.html)
-relied on government grants to fund its bandwidth; now that the grant
-has finished they're investigating the for-profit approach. Ultrareach
-and Freegate use the "sponsor" model to good effect, though they are
-constantly hunting for further sponsors to keep their network operational.
+place. By joining them into one big network, Tor ensures that the
+network is independent from the organization writing the software;
+so the network will be around down the road even if The Tor Project
+as an entity ceases to exist. Psiphon (psiphon.ca) takes the second
+approach: collecting money for service. They reason that if they can
+create a profitable company, then that company will be able to fund the
+network on an ongoing basis. The third approach is to rely on sponsors
+to pay for the bandwidth costs. The Java Anon Proxy or JAP project
+(anon.inf.tu-dresden.de/index_en.html) relied on government grants to
+fund its bandwidth; now that the grant has finished they're investigating
+the for-profit approach. Ultrareach and Freegate use the "sponsor" model
+to good effect, though they are constantly hunting for more sponsors to
+keep their network operational.
 
-After asking about the sustainability of their network, the next question
-is to ask about sustainability of the software itself. The same three
-approaches apply here, but the examples change. While Tor's network is
-operated by volunteers, Tor relies on sponsors (governments and NGOs)
+After asking about the long-term survival of the network, the next
+question is to ask about sustainability of the software itself. The same
+three approaches apply here, but the examples change. While Tor's network
+is operated by volunteers, Tor relies on sponsors (governments and NGOs)
 to fund new features and software maintenance. Ultrareach and Freegate,
 on the other hand, are in a more sustainable position with respect to
 software updates: they have a team of individuals around the world,
 mostly volunteers, devoted to making sure the tools are one step ahead
 of censors.
 
-Each of the three approaches can work. The key when evaluating a tool
-is to understand which approaches that tool uses, so you can predict
-what problems it might encounter in the future.
+Each of the three approaches can work, but understanding the approach
+a tool uses can help you predict what problems it might encounter in
+the future.
 
 4. Open design