3 ms·
Well I am. I have a right to. If you want to have plausible deniability when you inevitably must do something legally wrong but morally right, then you must alw
by seanw444 4y ago
Well I am. I have a right to. If you want to have plausible deniability when you inevitably must do something legally wrong but morally right, then you must always be hiding.
- Zetice 4y agoNo? Also I do struggle to think of a situation, for me, that would require TOR access in order to do something morally right but illegal.
- seanw444 4y agoThe most obvious example: whistleblowing.
- Zetice 4y agoFair enough, but I have no idea how that would require me to always use TOR, lest the insanely unlikely scenario arise that I need to expose some hidden information. Also wait, whistleblowing on the government? I’m not privy to anything like that.
- seanw444 4y agoMaybe not now. But you don't know what your life will look like in 10 years, or even 20. People end up in politics more than they ever imagined, out of necessity. It's the OpSec equivalent of holding something behind your back and saying "no, there's nothing there." Makes you look even more guilty. You look a lot less guilty if you hold non-suspicious things behind your back often. Then people are more likely to think you're odd, rather than guilty. Kind of a bad example, but you get the point in the abstract. Suddenly starting to join the Tor network often around the time some major information is leaked would be a strong correlator pointing to your guilt. I'm just using one example, but there are many scenarios where this matters.
- Zetice 4y agoHeh no, starting to access TOR is not suspicious or a correlator to anything, that’s the paranoia I’m talking about. Also I wouldn’t use TOR for this anyway.
- vorpalhex 4y agoYou don't. "Why did you suddenly download and install tor at 2am?" "I wanted to watch a weird porn and didn't want anyone else to know" Don't inconvenience your entire life for strictly theoretical situations.