[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 30 August 2017 at 15:19, Ben Tasker <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 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.

I entirely agree, but I feel that perhaps you missed one twist: that with
the churn which comes with "dark" markets changing their addresses (and
thus their reputational anchors) on a weekly basis, comes greater
opportunity for their inevitable customers to be fleeced by sites (say)
passing-off drugs cut with drain-cleaner as product, leading to a net of
greater misery (and probably death) by trying to drive the matter

This is "war on drugs"-type thinking.  Speaking as someone who to-date has
never even smoked pot, this seems like an intensely dumb idea.

    - alec

tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to