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

Re: [tor-talk] WP: The feds pay for 60 percent of Tor's development. Can users trust it?

Graham Todd:
>> However, I think a good case can be made for pseudonymous contributors
>> (I don't know, we may have them now).  It supports the philosophy of
>> the project, and allows contributions from those who may not have the
>> safety and freedom to contribute to a project like this publically.
>> Contributions from NSA and CIA employees aren't even necessarily
>> ill-intentioned, although I think it would be best to not have people
>> who might have a conflict of interest in any leadership or critical
>> position in development.
> Can I add my tuppence worth to this important thread?  I accepted that
> the FSF, in recommending I use gNewSense, was recommending a a totally
> free Linux distribution, because I believe (and still believe) that the
> endorsement by the FSF is a good measure of its integrity to be what it
> claims.

Integrity of what?

Ask yourself, why does FSF recommend gNewSense? Their top priority is
software freedom (and this is fine!), not necessarily
anonymity/privacy/security. I aggree, that software freedom is
interlinked to anonymity/privacy/security, but even if it was 100%
proven, that Debian, which is in my opinion totally Free as well, is
more anonymous/private/secure than gNewSense, but does not fulfill FSF's
high standards [1] [2], FSF would still recommend gNewSense over Debian,
I think.

So if anonymity/privacy/security is your top priority, FSF might not be
the most suitable institution to look for recommendations.

> Now we have to put our trust in the FSF, in GnuPG, in Tor and VPN
> tunnelling: but we should not have to do so.  We should be able to
> trust our governments to due the right thing as soon as possible.

I agree.

[1] https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsusbscribe or change other settings go to