[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-talk] Escape NSA just to enter commercial surveillance?
> On 32C3 a few weeks ago ...
> ... Roger cheered a lot about Facebook offering a hidden service.
> To be honest, this surprises me quite a bit. Tor is for anonymisation,
> so one can escape tax paid surveillance by NSA, GCHQ & Co., which is
> useful. And then such a Tor user connects to Facebook, where one has to
> log in, making this anonymisation completely pointless? At least I don't
> get the point.
> Even assuming that Facebook doesn't regularly exchange user data with
> NSA, this makes mass surveillance trivial. Useful, welcome, or not,
> Facebook does mass surveillance on its own, as stated business practice.
> Also, I'm pretty sure if another Manning-like case appears, NSA would
> immediately command Facebook to offer the related user identification.
> If there's cheering about Facebook hidden services, shouldn't always a
> note be added that logging in there identifies a user, making Tor
> (almost) pointless?
I understand the sentiment, but I think there's another angle.
People in the privacy/anonymity space tend to want to project hard
guidelines for users.
In reality, it's the users themselves who need to be making the choice,
so enhancing what they are using is a positive.
Let me give you a cold, hard example someone conveyed to me a long time
ago, in a context where it meant something:
"you tell me not to use Facebook so I can't be tracked? What if my
Facebook post can save 100 people's lives?"
Users need to be the ones to weigh the stakes, etc. It's not our job to
lay down the rules or doctrines.
Moreover, if Facebook, etc, decide to employ hidden services, it is good
publicity against the "hidden services are for terrorists and other
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to