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

Re: Using Tor at an on-line advocacy org

OpenPGP Security Info

Error - signature verification failed

gpg command line and output:
C:\\Program Files\\GNU\\GnuPG\\gpg.exe --charset utf8  --batch --no-tty
--status-fd 2 -d
gpg: Signature made 03/20/07 23:23:32 using DSA key ID 73246664
gpg: BAD signature from "Andrew Del Vecchio (Firefox-gen@xxxxxxxxxx GPG
Key (2048 bit)) <firefox-gen@xxxxxxxxxx>"

Andrew Del Vecchio wrote:
> Thanks for the insights so far. I have done some documentation work on
> the wiki, but I've run out of things to write. What are the areas most
> in need of documentation that is also NOT programming side, which I
> don't know much about? I also support the project financially already.
> Perhaps I can get some of our members to do so as well.
> We would be using Tor as a cover for a cluster of e-mail servers which
> send constituent messages to Congress. Currently, we do this directly,
> but we've had a few isolated "accidents" in the past that were not
> explained, and seemed a bit like political censorship, though we can't
> prove it due to the usual "plausible deniability" that politicians so
> treasure.
> I agree that this whole thing may have negative consequences, but
> would it be possible to configure Tor so that we had a separate node
> network that was not connected to Tor, at least not as far as end
> nodes go? This would shift and contain the blame to our participants
> and not the entire community. Still, governments are famous for their
> tendency toward collective punishment, so perhaps that wouldn't do
> much anyway.
> Is there any other solution?
> ~Andrew
> ----
> Frivolous lawsuits. Unlawful government seizures. What's YOUR defense?
> Protect your assets, keep what you earn, and generate more income at the
> same time!
> Visit http://www.mpassetprotection.com/ today.
> On 03/20/2007 07:05 PM, phobos@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 09:28:51PM -0700, firefox-gen@xxxxxxxxxx
> > wrote 1.5K bytes in 40 lines about: : Anyway, we are testing the
> > possibility of using Tor to help prevent : being blacklisted by
> > Congressional IT bureaucrats. In conjunction with
> > What would be blacklisted? Your current IPs and domains or Tor
> > Servers? Circumventing blocks with Tor will only result in Tor
> > being blocked. Angering Congress IT people doesn't seem smart.
> > Perhaps the people with which you interact aren't scientists, but
> > I'll assure you these people exist. Starting an arms race with
> > them is a losing proposition. Chances are they can outspend you on
> > solutions.
> > : this, we'd like to encourage participants (at least donor :
> > participants) to help out by running their own Tor exit nodes to :
> > improve the anonymity and bandwidth capability of the network we've
> > : all come to know and love. I'm all for doing this, but the
> > question : is, how do we do this in a proper manner? My fear is
> > that spreading : the word too much will get us in trouble
> > eventually. Worst case
> > "Yay Tor more nodes!" Helping create more Tor nodes is great.
> > Doing so with a long-term commitment is better. Your choices
> > really come down to funding your own projects or funding Tor to
> > build these things (LiveCD, USB Stick, point-click-tor-exit node,
> > tor exit node in a box if you will). There exist a few projects
> > similar to these. Many of these are orphans.
> > Alternatively, helping Tor better document and make it easier to
> > create exit nodes is just as big of a help. Having easy to follow
> > instructions and GUIs (such as Vidalia) go a long way towards more
> > nodes.
> > As for spreading the word, the horse is out of the barn and halfway
> > across the country. Tor is not a secret. If you're looking to
> > anger the IT dept for Congress, don't use Tor as the leverage.
> > It's bad for Tor, and bad for you in the long run.
> > These are my initial thoughts. I may have more later on.
> > Thanks!