Delivery-Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2015 07:09:52 -0400
Return-Path: <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on moria.seul.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,T_DKIM_INVALID,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Original-To: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-To: archiver@seul.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (eugeni.torproject.org [38.229.72.13])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by khazad-dum.seul.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10CD41E0309;
	Sun, 30 Aug 2015 07:09:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29D8F37801;
	Sun, 30 Aug 2015 11:09:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78EF8377A2
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sun, 30 Aug 2015 11:09:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at 
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (eugeni.torproject.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id XokZc_Jdav9j for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Sun, 30 Aug 2015 11:09:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.lapsedordinary.net (thinksmall.vps.bitfolk.com
 [85.119.83.85])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4682637796
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sun, 30 Aug 2015 11:09:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: delayed 472 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at eugeni;
 Sun, 30 Aug 2015 11:09:39 UTC
Received: by mail.lapsedordinary.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
 id 6B3993492D; Sun, 30 Aug 2015 11:01:42 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=lapsedordinary.net;
 s=mail; t=1440932502;
 bh=4cOXYWwNSGzHeUD3sgP48g/lXpbnfEkYHoRW8U1Z3Jc=;
 h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:
 Content-Type:In-Reply-To;
 b=oIKfwTdMLlBOfLb80t/AuGFj7mAByR6hm2M+bC/gAXR25m2R+ba38Ne2DPSTv26mn
 QFlvHfyKdPDWv1G0uaN93z7rS+8rJBLip0YKlSU8775WI0s0r5pUBMGyCjwi5TT5zX
 ijdp6vsYjvDQfUQZjcm9W1Q+WPkhYYg4OAVRgRrU=
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2015 11:01:42 +0000
From: Martijn Grooten <martijn@lapsedordinary.net>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
Message-ID: <20150830110142.GA8810@lapsedordinary.net>
References: <CAD2Ti2-KE9YgSkn0dDvb_kUhJqnuThZCxcGD8ptSynfOPUFkDw@mail.gmail.com>
 <55DEA955.1020209@tengu.ch>
 <CADop2NEZAR+LFvhPO5sQ3sxo-U+5Xu6qKZ5VbH6U9gMeko0j4w@mail.gmail.com>
 <AF4A93B5-C19E-4DE6-BDB4-14AE935181B8@tvdw.eu>
 <CAD2Ti28yxhdbTieUy8suUSXiyAxF-wpSVrnmSmc7Vq6=71Pa+w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAD2Ti28yxhdbTieUy8suUSXiyAxF-wpSVrnmSmc7Vq6=71Pa+w@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] IBM says Block Tor
X-BeenThere: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
List-Id: "all discussion about theory, design,
 and development of Onion Routing" <tor-talk.lists.torproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/>
List-Post: <mailto:tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org
Sender: "tor-talk" <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>

On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:14:52AM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> Some places allow tor for personal use for the explicit reason that
> they don't wish to be involved with policing employees freetime
> traffic on break, want to offer segregation, etc, in exactly the same
> way they don't regulate your cell phones.

Isn't the fact that mobile phones exist - and thus employees don't
depend on their employer's Internet connection during working hours - a
reason why companies blocking Tor isn't too big a deal?

I know companies that have a separate WiFi network in the building, not
connected to the corporate network, that employees can use to get a good
connection on their mobile devices (or personal laptops). They could use
Tor or VPNs too.

A company that blocks Tor because it's worried its employees are up to
no good should change the way it views its employees. A company overly
worried about employees using Tor to exfiltrate sensitive data should
consider blocking the whole of the Internet, or - more realisticly -
store sensitive data in a way that access is restricted to those that
really need it.

But a company that blocks Tor because, as IBM puts it, a lot of
malicious actors use Tor is making a sensible security decision.

Martijn


-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

