Re: [tor-talk] [liberationtech] Not another Haystack right?

[Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Eugen Leitl <eugen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 06:10:14PM +0100, Moritz Bartl wrote:
>
>> > In summary, I think we should try to expand the way people use Tor, as
>> > opposed to pushing them towards less safe solutions.
>>
>> Interesting. And I tend to agree. I feel there is more and more room for
>> a higher-latency suite of applications.
>
> Anything SMTP (especially if artificially slowed down) seems a good
> candidate. Taking a chapter from rms, send your requests to fetch
> HTTP resources via an email gateway. NNTP would be another.
If you are letting latency rise that high, a Type III remailer
suddenly becomes a plausible alternative to Tor. Could it be that the
demand for low-latency anonymity of the type Tor provides just isn't
that high, as it makes interactive use difficult?
> _______________________________________________
> tor-talk mailing list
> tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk



-- 
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin
_______________________________________________
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk