Delivery-Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 22:25:06 -0500
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=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID,
	URIBL_BLOCKED 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 2EED21E0E31;
	Mon, 15 Dec 2014 22:25:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE32632277;
	Tue, 16 Dec 2014 03:25:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6E743226F
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 03:24:56 +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 suV-oFOA0CJh for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Tue, 16 Dec 2014 03:24:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-qg0-x22e.google.com (mail-qg0-x22e.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::22e])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB0D432160
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 03:24:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qg0-f46.google.com with SMTP id q107so7479681qgd.33
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 19:24:54 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
 :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=KXeBOw8qYEEXQ4nZzG1QvluD3OpBOBqTSzuQWoJZ+jI=;
 b=Jo2pPRvKZtMqUwwWm/oSfo1Y96wTlxoR1V7h96snBIgtEuVw4liNcTangECy3YL4RA
 IFVaIOVeUToyuj7uaYV5w2eufydwOTe2P2ZkHXclgn3uZBoX/bIsA4RcdhZ3r+g5eL3U
 XdO0c0CRK1S5jg7R7DaHP6I4ejBB7Z/hel+ppQ3pB68PIlPZXHZHYwRW0KdSRZvaFH/A
 WXVlGDFgVKSGy2hjGLe6kMLwdYzpzJo3SlHubyIt406QMwYJqb9oARAGELGEOtfKRDx/
 szDE6cFI1hLnZIUBmAFkU8hAGmcfxoSV6TCsGtHiBPXXPWnCJSw8BH54bPoEa1y6clzy
 GeaQ==
X-Received: by 10.140.23.244 with SMTP id 107mr59944654qgp.14.1418700294411;
 Mon, 15 Dec 2014 19:24:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (host174.186-108-69.telecom.net.ar. [186.108.69.174])
 by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id
 n5sm12597274qat.13.2014.12.15.19.24.52
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
 Mon, 15 Dec 2014 19:24:53 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <548fa605.8587e00a.324e.1257@mx.google.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 00:27:05 -0300
From: Juan <juan.g71@gmail.com>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
In-Reply-To: <CAOsGNSTHRYsh_oAHvmxnqj9DnaiPhZtBNTYKm=sdQaSKrNs1Jg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20141212192012.gi34412@moria.seul.org>
 <548b52ee.f4698c0a.3562.ffffe389@mx.google.com>
 <548b322b.0480e00a.1143.ffffb753@mx.google.com>
 <caas2fgtnwcjcdoq6nd_xjc2e=ipcrxk-a4kiogxqfnq+2k8ahg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20141211223234.gh34412@moria.seul.org>
 <548b69b5.4010801@riseup.net>
 <20141211220732.gg34412@moria.seul.org>
 <548b9707.275f8c0a.9917.1e7c@mx.google.com>
 <4501644E616.00000588beatthebastards@inbox.com>
 <CAEydrT8JR3T0vtY3T7WU2cQrZ01c95hz0it7QS7nux0E6CHefQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1418529175.1604076.202607849.52A4D1BD@webmail.messagingengine.com>
 <CAOsGNST_4o9-PDsSZxXcnfqiJERc0ta2xu61wMWPhJ-pR2+C0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <548E88C2.2030104@riseup.net>
 <CAOsGNSTHRYsh_oAHvmxnqj9DnaiPhZtBNTYKm=sdQaSKrNs1Jg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.10 (GTK+ 2.24.10; i486-slitaz-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Tor and solidarity against online harassment
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 Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:07:19 +1100
Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:


> >
> >> So caution, paranoia, attention to detail, proper assessment of the
> >> risks and technical foundations/ requirements/ possibilities of
> >> what TOR can, and more importantly cannot provide, is (in such
> >> circumstances) of utmost importance.
> >
> > Yes. I write a lot about such matters.
> >
> > However, as Jonathan Wilkes noted yesterday, there's a risk of
> > frightening away users and potential relay operators. For better or
> > worse, Tor is the best low-latency anonymity network around. In the
> > short term at least, hurting Tor benefits many enemies of freedom.
> 
> "Educating new users" must not be allowed to be seen the same as
> "hurting tor", I'm sure Juan would agree here.
> 
> "Hurting tor" might not be the best term, but perhaps we can say
> 'scare-mongering' may cause potential users to run away, thereby
> reducing our community, and that this is undesirable; I'd hope Juan
> would agree with this.


	Yes, I don't mean to get people who benefit from tor to stop
	using it. Or to put it another way : as long as tor weakens
	state power, I think it's a useful tool. But, what does the
	bigger picture look like? What may happen is that while tor
	helps some people in some ways, it also consolidates US* state
	power. In that case I think tor is a legitimate target.


*and the power of 'allied' states too.

> 
> But I have to agree that whenever we see "omg tor is so ponies and
> freedom", that Juan's voice of "whoah, slow the fuck down guys, Tor
> and TBB cannot save you from nation-state monitoring, and make sure
> you're aware of potential problems a b and c" is much better than no
> genuine voice of caution.
> 
> And I have to say - every newcomer that appears here, must be the
> beneficiary of our best efforts in communication, for we simply cannot
> know if -this-particular- newbie is in need of the most careful advice
> to be cautious or not.
> 
> So -because- Tor is the currently most viable "privacy of some level/
> some sort" newtwork today, we particularly owe it to be diligent and
> -never- fail to impress upon newcomers what they may need to keep in
> their minds.


	And, newcomers, who aren't likely to know too much about
	security take a look at 

	https://www.torproject.org/

	and see 

	"Defend yourself against network surveillance and traffic
	analysis." 

	Traffic analysis? That's exactly what tor cannot prevent
	depending on who is doing the analysis. 
	


> 
> 
> > There is no question that Tor was developed for the US military.
> > And the Tor Project is still funded largely (and for argument sake,
> > entirely) by the US government. But even so, I've seen no credible
> > evidence that Tor is backdoored or intentionally vulnerable.
> >
> > It is true that Tor's threat model explicitly excludes global
> > adversaries, who can break anonymity by correlating entry and exit
> > traffic. It's also true that some proposed low-latency anonymity
> > networks may resist traffic analysis far better than Tor does.
> > However, these are highly technical matters, and there is much room
> > for debate. I am by no means qualified to have an opinion on the
> > merits.
> >
> > One might argue that the US government funding gives Tor an
> > unwarranted advantage, or even that it suppresses work on
> > alternatives. As paranoid as I am, that seems unworkable. But of
> > course, I defer to evidence.
> 
> Mirimir, your words in this email might make a good start for a "Quick
> educational caution" which newcomers ought be pointed to, say on the
> tp.o wiki.
> 
> To help those who need it stay as safe as might be needed and/ or
> possible, certainly requires helping them, as early as possible,
> framing a mindset and certain understandings. Perhaps we can do better
> on this front.
> 
> Over to others,
> Zenaan

-- 
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

