[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [michael.holstein@csuohio.edu: Re: Anonymity questions]

Hmm. So is the media wrong too or are they actually in support of passive, all-encompassing taps, just not on targeted individuals?! That seems very backward don't you think?


Chris Palmer wrote:
ADB writes:

No crap. That's only if they're specifically watching YOU or something
you're connected to in some way. However, a large, vibrant Tor network
would greatly hinder 'roving wiretap' type passive intel gathering

Roving wiretaps are *active* intelligence gathering operations. :) A
roving wiretap is a wiretap in which the tappers have been authorized by
a court to tap any phone the subject uses, not just a single phone (as
in normal wiretap orders).

Anyway, I'm not sure what effect Tor would have on something like the
NSA's warrantless wiretapping program. They keep pretty detailed logs
(and/or they can make use of the telco's pretty detailed logs, as EFF
has alleged in its suit against ATT; I can provide some references to
what typical logs contain if anyone cares), so they may still be able to
do post facto, passive traffic analysis on streams carried by Tor.

As the FAQ and Roger are careful to say, Tor does not defend against
such powerful adversaries.