Re: [tor-relays] Anonbox Project

[Thomas White <thomaswhite@xxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I understand the approach of this, but it again reverts back to the
problem of people believing a product will provide them reasonable
protection without the responsibility of having to take measures
themselves. There are stories everyday in the newspapers who think
using a fake name on Facebook is enough to stop police tracking the
actions of that account to them.

As in the other reply to this message, the hardware isn't open source
and there has been a critique posted below:

https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/2j9caq/anonabox_tor_router_box_is_false_representation

Well intentioned, but as many before me have highlighted; good
intentions is not enough if the product does not provide true
security. Tor is a technology like many things, but I feel this
product is out to make a buck from open source software while
under-delivering on it's promises by providing an inferior product.
How many more times do we need people to be put off Tor because
somebody makes a crap implementation and a headline follows with the
usual "TOR IS BROKEN"?

The money in that kickstarter is proof there is cash to fund such
things, but it is now in the hands of people riding the wave following
the NSA fallout in hope for profit and not actual innovation.

- -T


On 15/10/2014 15:51, Andrew Lewman wrote:
> On 10/15/2014 08:00 AM, Thomas White wrote:
>> I am personally hoping somebody high up in the Tor Project
>> management will openly condemn this atrocity and hopefully
>> Kickstarter and the funders will withdraw their funds before a
>> whole load of people buy into this "security as a tool" idea.
> 
> I'm more inclined to support him. He appears to be taking our
> designs and thoughts verbatim from Jake's initial thoughts on a
> torouter[1]. Access Now did some work on the OpenWRT version of the
> torouter[2]. Now is our chance to help shape this into a product we
> like. Others have tried to take their own approach without such
> attention to technical details.
> 
> I look forward to having some smart people analyze the final
> product and figure out where the strengths and weaknesses lie.
> Anonabox's response to this analysis will tell us far more than
> anything else.
> 
> 
> [1] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/Torouter
> 
> [2] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/OpenWRT
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
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=7LQU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays