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

Re: Some legal trouble with TOR in France +

On May 15, 2006, at 6:17 PM, glymr wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

User 165 wrote: 
On May 15, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Anthony DiPierro wrote:


Remember that by default Tor *does* censor.  Port 25 is blocked
by default.  Why is this?


I don't think that deciding which ports to allow has anything to do
 with censorship.  Censorship refers to content, not method.

I think this line of discussion is irrelevant anyway, because saying
'we don't censor' yet you are censoring censorship? The bigger issue
is that there is so many zombie machines, this is not about censorship
of email but simply a defense against a very large attacker whose
activities would impact the exit nodes.

I guess I would like to prevent censorship on tor, you're right. I would prefer it if exit nodes operators were prevented from any sort blocking based on source, destination or content, and have SafeLogging hardcoded to true in release versions. I would like the C, I, and A, as well as anonymity to be unquestioned with regards to tor. There are other ways to get information about the connections, but it would be nice to say that you cannot get that information or perform any sort of censorship or compromising of the integrity of data sent through or availability of any destination on the internet using tor itself. I thought this was the whole point of tor. It should try to attain the same neutrality as a large backbone router, at least as much as is possible. I don't want to have to worry that I'm actually connecting to the site I think I am. That's why I don't like RedirectExit .

User 165
user165@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part