Re: [tor-talk] Illegal Activity As A Metric of Tor Security and Anonymity

[Mark McCarron <mark.mccarron@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I understand everyone's feelings here and tempers can run hot.  Firstly, not everyone in the US government supports the current behaviour, its a minority in senior positions.  The rest are just following orders although some of them need to get a backbone and remember the oath they have taken and what their nation stands for.

Right now we have a situation where National Security concerns are trumping everything and that is certainly not the basis for a free world.  I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd rather face the enemy than hide like a coward jumping at every shadow.  I grew up with terrorism and the cold war, with the very distinct possibility of dying.  I rather run the risk of been blown to pieces, or shot, than support a stasi-like spy state that will protect me.  Throwing away freedom to safe-guard against possible threats is no way to go through life, in the end, it means you have lost your nation.  It means you did the enemy's work, which is by any measure a form treason.

Anyway, we have a simple solution to this global view and hidden services.  We just implement a distributed hosting solution within the Tor system and end-to-end visibility is gone.

Regards,

Mark McCarron

> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 11:19:00 -0300
> From: juan.g71@xxxxxxxxx
> To: tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Illegal Activity As A Metric of Tor Security and Anonymity
> 
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 13:48:27 -0700
> coderman <coderman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Juan <juan.g71@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >...
> > >         And so we have amusing tor lackeys like ¨coderman¨
> > >         parroting propaganda that not even the tor developers
> > >         themselves believe.
> > 
> > this is amusing! explain to me where i've said Tor resists traffic
> > analysis? :)
> 
> 	As I already mentioned,  you and others talk as if that were the
> 	case. As a matter of fact you are doing it again in this 
> 	(previous) message of yours.
> 
> > 
> > my point is that Tor is harder than the software you're using over it.
> 
> 	That is just a generality, a half truth, and not relevant in
> 	this context.  It is an excuse and a distraction.
> 
> 
> > web browsers, instant messaging clients, web services and poorly
> > implemented applications.
> > 
> > why do you need traffic analysis when trivial attacks work just as
> > well?
> 
> 	I dont need traffic analysis, I am not a government nazi. 
> 
> 	However,  government nazis do need traffic analysis to
> 	deal with people who correctly configure their servers.
> 
> 	It shouldnt be necessary for me to point out such obvious
> 	fact? 
> 
> 	Also, if attacks against  servers are ´easy´,
> 	why did it take years for the government  to get freedom
> 	hosting? 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >         So, how did the american gestapo get freedom hosting and
> > > silk road? Traffic analysis.
> > 
> > citation needed.  all signs point to insider threat (you know, rats)
> 
> 
> 	Citation needed? What kind of citation? I make my case based on
> 	basic, correct reasoning and public information. And you have
> 	nothing to counter it. 
> 
> 	And what are *you* doing? Are you indeed parroting the
> 	official story? Are you that ´naive´? 
> 
> 	> all signs point to insider threat (you know, rats)
> 
> 	So, wheres **your** evidence for that parallel story? 
> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >         https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
> > 
> > we could have a long discussion on this subject, but not apropos to
> > this list...
> 
> 	What? You dont want to discuss how fuckingly corrupt the US
> 	government is in a list that belongs to the US government? 
> 
> 	You dont want to discuss the fact that the american ´justice´
> 	system is based on blatant lies and that they even have a
> 	procedure in place to manage those blatant lies?
> 
> 	tsk tsk tsk 
> 	
> 	And, au contraire, the discussion is 100% a propos this mailing
> 	list. 
> 
> 	See, you are basing your baseless defence of Tor (US
> 	military project)  on lies from the US government, lies which in
> 	turn can be traced to so called ¨parallel contstruction¨.
> 
> 	
> > 
> > 
> > best regards,
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > TL;DR:  Tor is not the weak spot in your privacy. 
> 
> 
> 	Baseless assertion.
> 
> 
> > OPSEC, application
> > attack surface, pervasive information insecurity - these are all going
> > to betray you before some fundamental vulnerability in Tor protocol.
> 
> 
> 	False, baseless assertion. Notice again  how you fail to
> 	specify the ´threat model´, to use your military jargon.
> 
> 	You are not explicitly saying that tor resists traffic
> 	analysis, but you are saying something that amounts to the same
> 	thing - that traffic analysis doesnt matter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J.
> 
> -- 
> tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
 		 	   		  
-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk