10 ms·

Fair enough. But I would argue that qualifying Tor as a group targeting world governments is a bit dramatic. That may be propagandist commentary on their part -

Fair enough. But I would argue that qualifying Tor as a group targeting world governments is a bit dramatic. That may be propagandist commentary on their part - they're entitled to make it, and people still use Tor in spite of it - but isn't the primary intention of Tor to preserve free speech and anonymity, and to offer protection from persecution (or prosecution) by nation-states that seek to quell dissent? And if all the worlds' governments are truly the stated target of Tor, why on earth should an American academic institution insinuate itself into that battlefield? For that matter, given the stated powers of our governments network and data analysis engines, why were they even needed?

mentat 11y ago
They provided information "on that battlefield" that shows that Tor is wholly inadequate to "offer protection from persecution by nation-states". If you're in a place where your life is on the line and you think Tor will help you, this shows clearly that is incorrect. That is useful, even critical information, since lives depend on it. Maybe you don't know the source or the method but the output is very valuable.
- mtgx 11y ago
  That's only somewhat true, though. Russia tried to break Tor's anonymity and failed. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-22/russia-s-plan-to-crack-tor-crumbles http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-22/russia-s-p...
thaumasiotes 11y ago
> I would argue that qualifying Tor as a group targeting world governments is a bit dramatic. That may be propagandist commentary on their part - they're entitled to make it, and people still use Tor in spite of it - but isn't the primary intention of Tor to preserve free speech and anonymity, and to offer protection from persecution (or prosecution) by nation-states that seek to quell dissent? I don't understand what you're trying to say. Surely, if the primary intention of Tor is to protect users from persecution by nation-states, then their adversaries are world governments?

mentat 11y ago

They provided information "on that battlefield" that shows that Tor is wholly inadequate to "offer protection from persecution by nation-states". If you're in a place where your life is on the line and you think Tor will help you, this shows clearly that is incorrect. That is useful, even critical information, since lives depend on it. Maybe you don't know the source or the method but the output is very valuable.

mtgx 11y ago
That's only somewhat true, though. Russia tried to break Tor's anonymity and failed. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-22/russia-s-plan-to-crack-tor-crumbles http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-22/russia-s-p...

thaumasiotes 11y ago

> I would argue that qualifying Tor as a group targeting world governments is a bit dramatic. That may be propagandist commentary on their part - they're entitled to make it, and people still use Tor in spite of it - but isn't the primary intention of Tor to preserve free speech and anonymity, and to offer protection from persecution (or prosecution) by nation-states that seek to quell dissent? I don't understand what you're trying to say. Surely, if the primary intention of Tor is to protect users from persecution by nation-states, then their adversaries are world governments?