3 ms·

It's safe if you ain't a pedo or terrorist. Sometimes I wonder wtf y'all are doing with such crazy security expectations and paranoia.

mass_and_energy 2y ago
The implication of the right to privacy being unnecessary because you have nothing to hide is akin to declaring the right to free speech unnecessary because you have nothing to say. The ability to maintain privacy and anonymity is not for today, it's for tomorrow.
- ciiiicii 2y ago
  I don't think many people seriously think that terrorists planning attacks to maim and kill people, and pedophiles sharing child sexual abuse imagery with each other, have an absolute right to privacy in such communications, nor that doing so is an example of free speech. Really it's a good thing that the "global adversary" is - almost certainly - keeping tabs on Tor traffic and tracking down who is responsible for the worst abuses within this network.
  - lapphi 2y ago
    You sound like a stalin era communist. The secret police are spying on you for your own good!
    - ciiiicii 2y ago
      Not sure what you mean. Gathering evidence is a vital part of investigating criminal activity. In the age of the internet, this includes evidence generated on computer networks, such as connection metadata from distributed systems like Tor. Why, in your view, is this akin to Stalinism? It's just standard police work adapted for modern technologies, not an indication of totalitarian governance.
      - mass_and_energy 2y ago
        Because it exceeds the ruleset mutually agreed upon when it comes to the methods. There was a gentleman named Edward Snowden who worked at a law enforcement agency called the National Security Agency, or the NSA for short. They operate in the United States of America. The United States of America is a democracy, and has an agreed upon system in which the populace has a say about the rules their society must follow. These are called laws. American people and institutions are expected to follow these laws. Pc is referencing the leader of a regime called the USSR. The USSR did not practice democracy, and it's agencies did not have to abide by the laws of the USSR. The reason American law enforcement agencies are being compared to Stalinist (USSR) ones is because the aforementioned gentlemen Edward Snowden proved that, not unlike the USSR, American LEAs do not follow their countries laws either. Does that make sense? I'm happy to clarify further, knowledge is power and I seek to empower those around me (y)
        ciiiicii 2y ago
        Edward Snowden is a Russian agent who sought to damage USA intelligence agencies as much as he possibly could, disingenuously framing it as whistleblowing. It's unfortunate that many people, such as yourself, have been taken in by his story and don't see the bigger picture. Also, gathering metadata on Tor usage to break anonymity is not actually against any law. It'll be done within the legal framework that permits collection and analysis of intelligence data.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
  Where do I say it's unnecessary?
nurumaik 2y ago
Not everyone lives in a country where government is a friend
- bornfreddy 2y ago
  And even if it is today, a fiend is just one bad election away.
- o999 2y ago
  Noone does..
RiverCrochet 2y ago
1. It's fun. Playing with these technologies is entertaining and will learn you some good stuff about the networking and the encryption and what not. 2. Tor allows reception of unsolicited TCP/IPv4 traffic if you are behind a NAT you can't open ports for, because your connection to the network is initiated on your side. This is nice, especially with increasing prevalence of CGNAT. 3. Something my niece stated when I talked to her about it, who I disagree with: Many countries have a notion of upstanding citizen enforced by well funded and maintained violence-monopoly actors (R) that are not equivalent to what the majority of citizens actually do (S). R minus S is T - the tolerance gap. Things that allow T to exist include lack of will to prosecute, general social acceptance of things that were not acceptable years ago, etc. All things that are quite mutable. If your activities fall into T, privacy-enforcement tech benefits you if R and S might change in the future. FWIW I am firmly in the "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" camp and I looked at her funny when she said this. Maybe she is a criminal or just crazy, idk.
- spl757 2y ago
  I'd like to place a camera in every room of your house and stream them on my website. Surely you won't mind because you have nothing to hide. Right?
- Naturally 2y ago
  Your niece's reasoning sounds excellent to me, I am pleased you have included it.
- WolfeReader 2y ago
  You believe you have "nothing to hide" from 1. your own government, 2. the government of a nation you happen to be visiting or communicating with, 3. corporations who slurp up and sell personal data, 4. organized crime, 5. con artists and phishers looking for an easy mark, 6. people who personally want to harm you or exploit you, 7. people who want to harm others in your life and would use you as a means to do so, 8. people who want to harm your race/gender/religion/etc and identified you as a member of their targeted group. Really? End-to-end encryption technologies (of which TOR is one) help prevent entire categories of attacks which would otherwise be available to all of those groups, to use against you and others.
cykros 2y ago
Some people live in the UK, or Germany. Or heck, just want to criticize the UK from anywhere in the world but don't want to find out whether their threat to extradite actually has any teeth.

mass_and_energy 2y ago

The implication of the right to privacy being unnecessary because you have nothing to hide is akin to declaring the right to free speech unnecessary because you have nothing to say. The ability to maintain privacy and anonymity is not for today, it's for tomorrow.

ciiiicii 2y ago
I don't think many people seriously think that terrorists planning attacks to maim and kill people, and pedophiles sharing child sexual abuse imagery with each other, have an absolute right to privacy in such communications, nor that doing so is an example of free speech. Really it's a good thing that the "global adversary" is - almost certainly - keeping tabs on Tor traffic and tracking down who is responsible for the worst abuses within this network.
- lapphi 2y ago
  You sound like a stalin era communist. The secret police are spying on you for your own good!
  - ciiiicii 2y ago
    Not sure what you mean. Gathering evidence is a vital part of investigating criminal activity. In the age of the internet, this includes evidence generated on computer networks, such as connection metadata from distributed systems like Tor. Why, in your view, is this akin to Stalinism? It's just standard police work adapted for modern technologies, not an indication of totalitarian governance.
    - mass_and_energy 2y ago
      Because it exceeds the ruleset mutually agreed upon when it comes to the methods. There was a gentleman named Edward Snowden who worked at a law enforcement agency called the National Security Agency, or the NSA for short. They operate in the United States of America. The United States of America is a democracy, and has an agreed upon system in which the populace has a say about the rules their society must follow. These are called laws. American people and institutions are expected to follow these laws. Pc is referencing the leader of a regime called the USSR. The USSR did not practice democracy, and it's agencies did not have to abide by the laws of the USSR. The reason American law enforcement agencies are being compared to Stalinist (USSR) ones is because the aforementioned gentlemen Edward Snowden proved that, not unlike the USSR, American LEAs do not follow their countries laws either. Does that make sense? I'm happy to clarify further, knowledge is power and I seek to empower those around me (y)
      - ciiiicii 2y ago
        Edward Snowden is a Russian agent who sought to damage USA intelligence agencies as much as he possibly could, disingenuously framing it as whistleblowing. It's unfortunate that many people, such as yourself, have been taken in by his story and don't see the bigger picture. Also, gathering metadata on Tor usage to break anonymity is not actually against any law. It'll be done within the legal framework that permits collection and analysis of intelligence data.
2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
Where do I say it's unnecessary?

nurumaik 2y ago

Not everyone lives in a country where government is a friend

bornfreddy 2y ago
And even if it is today, a fiend is just one bad election away.
o999 2y ago
Noone does..

RiverCrochet 2y ago

1. It's fun. Playing with these technologies is entertaining and will learn you some good stuff about the networking and the encryption and what not. 2. Tor allows reception of unsolicited TCP/IPv4 traffic if you are behind a NAT you can't open ports for, because your connection to the network is initiated on your side. This is nice, especially with increasing prevalence of CGNAT. 3. Something my niece stated when I talked to her about it, who I disagree with: Many countries have a notion of upstanding citizen enforced by well funded and maintained violence-monopoly actors (R) that are not equivalent to what the majority of citizens actually do (S). R minus S is T - the tolerance gap. Things that allow T to exist include lack of will to prosecute, general social acceptance of things that were not acceptable years ago, etc. All things that are quite mutable. If your activities fall into T, privacy-enforcement tech benefits you if R and S might change in the future. FWIW I am firmly in the "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" camp and I looked at her funny when she said this. Maybe she is a criminal or just crazy, idk.

spl757 2y ago
I'd like to place a camera in every room of your house and stream them on my website. Surely you won't mind because you have nothing to hide. Right?
Naturally 2y ago
Your niece's reasoning sounds excellent to me, I am pleased you have included it.
WolfeReader 2y ago
You believe you have "nothing to hide" from 1. your own government, 2. the government of a nation you happen to be visiting or communicating with, 3. corporations who slurp up and sell personal data, 4. organized crime, 5. con artists and phishers looking for an easy mark, 6. people who personally want to harm you or exploit you, 7. people who want to harm others in your life and would use you as a means to do so, 8. people who want to harm your race/gender/religion/etc and identified you as a member of their targeted group. Really? End-to-end encryption technologies (of which TOR is one) help prevent entire categories of attacks which would otherwise be available to all of those groups, to use against you and others.

cykros 2y ago

Some people live in the UK, or Germany. Or heck, just want to criticize the UK from anywhere in the world but don't want to find out whether their threat to extradite actually has any teeth.