5 ms·

> We’ve met news organizations around the world who suffer crippling digital attacks when they publish something controversial. Good...except Google doesn't pr

> We’ve met news organizations around the world who suffer crippling digital attacks when they publish something controversial. Good...except Google doesn't protect you from such attacks once the US gov deems it illegal. We need a safe, anonymous protocol not the network of X corporation.

CraftThatBlock 10y ago
So... Tor?
- ryanlol 10y ago
  The botnet attacking Krebs could in all likelihood take down the entire Tor network.
  - rtkwe 10y ago
    The advertised bandwidth for the whole network is much lower than the 600+GBps that's attacking Kerbs it's a little under 200 GBps. https://metrics.torproject.org/bandwidth.html https://metrics.torproject.org/bandwidth.html
    - sandworm101 10y ago
      Tor has too many friends. I dislike the trend of Tor being used to control botnets, but the upside is that an entire underworld now sees tor as an asset. Any non-state attacking Tor would make some very interesting enemies.
      - rtkwe 10y ago
        Without the particular bot net/what have you taking credit for it do we generally know who is running a DDOS?
      - ryanlol 10y ago
        Enemies? Hah, you mean extortion targets!
  - nickpsecurity 10y ago
    It was one of early threats I described on the Tor network. NSA et all could easily pay for it to be done. Consistently. Year after year. I think the only reason they haven't is that U.S. and foreign intelligence services themselves find Tor so useful. Can't take down one's own tool for disrupting the competition. ;)
- themihai 10y ago
  Tor is not good enough. That's the reason we see this kind proposals.
- metaphorm 10y ago
  Tor can obfuscate the origin of https requests (assumedly, if we continue to believe Tor isn't infiltrated and surveiled, which it probably is). It cannot protect against DDoS attacks.
- dublinben 10y ago
  A network like Freenet would be more appropriate for a situation like this. Its peer to peer nature is like bittorrent, so the more popular content is, the more it is replicated, and thus becomes easier to access. It shouldn't be impossible to design a distributed network that has a positive feedback loop that makes a DDOS counterproductive, by actually boosting the targeted materials.
  - lkmlkmsfd 10y ago
    > so the more popular content is, the more it is replicated, and thus becomes easier to access. Self censorship.
  - Natanael_L 10y ago
    I2P + Tahoe-LAFS, IPFS
wstrange 10y ago
Technology alone is never going to solve this problem. IMHO, focusing on Google's actions is not productive. All large corporations need to be watched carefully, and Google is no exception, but their motives are fairly transparent. The real culprit here is government overreach. This is the core problem that we should be focusing on.
- themihai 10y ago
  The law will always be abused by those in power be it corporations, individuals or governments so I think technology is actually the main part of the solution. Google along with other parties can contribute to technologies(i.e. end to end encryption) that protect our liberties but this friendship/network sharing proposal seems just wrong to me. They can't stand to MPAA requests, let alone NSA or its friends(i.e. UK's GCHQ). In live threatening situations you can't trust a corporation not to give your data to the local governmental authorities. I'm not even considering that their network could be hacked or they are simply a rough actor. `Fairly transparent` is not enough. The latest revelations just proved it. If you can't publish sensitive information there can't be a debate/case for government overreach/abuse in the first place thus the reason why technology became so important.

CraftThatBlock 10y ago

So... Tor?

ryanlol 10y ago
The botnet attacking Krebs could in all likelihood take down the entire Tor network.
- rtkwe 10y ago
  The advertised bandwidth for the whole network is much lower than the 600+GBps that's attacking Kerbs it's a little under 200 GBps. https://metrics.torproject.org/bandwidth.html https://metrics.torproject.org/bandwidth.html
  - sandworm101 10y ago
    Tor has too many friends. I dislike the trend of Tor being used to control botnets, but the upside is that an entire underworld now sees tor as an asset. Any non-state attacking Tor would make some very interesting enemies.
    - rtkwe 10y ago
      Without the particular bot net/what have you taking credit for it do we generally know who is running a DDOS?
    - ryanlol 10y ago
      Enemies? Hah, you mean extortion targets!
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  It was one of early threats I described on the Tor network. NSA et all could easily pay for it to be done. Consistently. Year after year. I think the only reason they haven't is that U.S. and foreign intelligence services themselves find Tor so useful. Can't take down one's own tool for disrupting the competition. ;)
themihai 10y ago
Tor is not good enough. That's the reason we see this kind proposals.
metaphorm 10y ago
Tor can obfuscate the origin of https requests (assumedly, if we continue to believe Tor isn't infiltrated and surveiled, which it probably is). It cannot protect against DDoS attacks.
dublinben 10y ago
A network like Freenet would be more appropriate for a situation like this. Its peer to peer nature is like bittorrent, so the more popular content is, the more it is replicated, and thus becomes easier to access. It shouldn't be impossible to design a distributed network that has a positive feedback loop that makes a DDOS counterproductive, by actually boosting the targeted materials.
- lkmlkmsfd 10y ago
  > so the more popular content is, the more it is replicated, and thus becomes easier to access. Self censorship.
- Natanael_L 10y ago
  I2P + Tahoe-LAFS, IPFS

wstrange 10y ago

Technology alone is never going to solve this problem. IMHO, focusing on Google's actions is not productive. All large corporations need to be watched carefully, and Google is no exception, but their motives are fairly transparent. The real culprit here is government overreach. This is the core problem that we should be focusing on.

themihai 10y ago
The law will always be abused by those in power be it corporations, individuals or governments so I think technology is actually the main part of the solution. Google along with other parties can contribute to technologies(i.e. end to end encryption) that protect our liberties but this friendship/network sharing proposal seems just wrong to me. They can't stand to MPAA requests, let alone NSA or its friends(i.e. UK's GCHQ). In live threatening situations you can't trust a corporation not to give your data to the local governmental authorities. I'm not even considering that their network could be hacked or they are simply a rough actor. `Fairly transparent` is not enough. The latest revelations just proved it. If you can't publish sensitive information there can't be a debate/case for government overreach/abuse in the first place thus the reason why technology became so important.