[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Alec Muffett <alec.muffett@xxxxxxxxx>
> On 30 August 2017 at 15:07, Ben Tasker <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > That's not quite the claim he's making though. He seems to be claiming
> > "legitimate" (in his eyes) service shouldn't mind sacrificing their own
> > anonymity by being linked to a clearnet identity and becoming a
> > onion to avoid the rolling rotation.
> In other words: you have to pay-to-play in order to have security; pay for
> a DNS domain, be subject to takedown and
> spoofing-between-the-onion-verifier-and-the-attribution-site, and
> deanonymisation / doxxing / throttling / regulation / imprisonment via
> blocking payments to your hosting or DNS provider.
> To slave onionspace to the clearnet, in other words.
Yes, that'd be my reading of it.
The alternative is that you are free to speak/write, but no-one can ever
find you because your onion address will change every week, so any coverage
you might get of an issue will last, at most, a week.
Meanwhile, the drug-markets and other "vile" things he want to block will
carry on unabated because a subset of their users will put the effort in to
update a central resource weekly to note what the new address is. If that
user is an administrator, they could even sign the updates with a
predisclosed key to minimise the likelihood of you being lead to a fake by
a bad actor. So everyone else gets shot in the foot, while what he wants to
block only blinks briefly.
> - alec
> tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to