Delivery-Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 15:42:06 -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=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID
	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 40A101E0C9F
	for <archiver@seul.org>; Tue,  1 Jul 2014 15:42:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 934662E744;
	Tue,  1 Jul 2014 19:41:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9073A2E4CA
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue,  1 Jul 2014 19:37:56 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eugeni.torproject.org
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 gHI_shchL9AP for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Tue,  1 Jul 2014 19:37:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-yk0-x22e.google.com (mail-yk0-x22e.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::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 6C7582DC42
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue,  1 Jul 2014 19:37:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-yk0-f174.google.com with SMTP id 19so5936322ykq.19
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 01 Jul 2014 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
 :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=G2BqdPHs22JSVKVG4X8dZSo4vHjE7Zgb9a/213KI/qE=;
 b=K2ALqiNtCp9uaZPeVEd4CZOOopQRWu7diqPlVS4QU+cjpHcoO258V+t4qq93D06Mge
 GCnI+kCVcFxNVEglGzgZ1dWg+sUbPcetI/MFHt7J15r9psXFCyPq7GmChnvuqns9UTgq
 HVWqngT90EOWPO/Wu4caZ3CmcC8tZtUfbgnbO8aPGXClRbvOeTTnuOCwwo3Qhwd2Hwu1
 rziMc2HSe2P02LUTHb5dQhtRZD2oLN00Qab0vRMPOqy+zch81Fdvd7Idb8S22lE3fXMJ
 v7ye3Gkt7Rdovfzij/rUFLQg4gnanxs6qnd0Af5P5+3t5hL9OJhAxCrsYfTvJWoo+pj4
 llTA==
X-Received: by 10.236.152.169 with SMTP id d29mr26654429yhk.83.1404243473569; 
 Tue, 01 Jul 2014 12:37:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unknown ([64.76.4.130])
 by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id r38sm29569821yhp.37.2014.07.01.12.37.50
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
 Tue, 01 Jul 2014 12:37:53 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 16:41:30 -0300
From: Juan <juan.g71@gmail.com>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
Message-ID: <20140701164130.00001a78@unknown>
In-Reply-To: <20140701183608.GC8758@buridan.fw5540.net>
References: <53b16e92.4bb.dd547700.2a1fac89@t-3.net>
 <20140630181150.579a117b@gate.rlogin.net>
 <DUB121-W340733C713F86F8887940DC8040@phx.gbl>
 <53B234B4.5010705@cyblings.on.ca>
 <DUB121-W87B38C15F614AFC2BF53BC8070@phx.gbl>
 <272befac-46cd-4eb4-b1d8-73aa517f590d@email.android.com>
 <DUB121-W257E25780AF7E06F86145CC8070@phx.gbl>
 <20140701183608.GC8758@buridan.fw5540.net>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0cvs12 (GTK+ 2.16.6; i586-pc-mingw32msvc)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Illegal Activity As A Metric of Tor Security and
 Anonymity
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="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Errors-To: tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org
Sender: "tor-talk" <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>

On Tue, 1 Jul 2014 14:36:08 -0400
Paul Syverson <paul.syverson@nrl.navy.mil> wrote:


> =

> People have denied over and over your allegations that Tor was somehow
> designed to be intentionally vulnerable in some way. =


	Tor is  vulnerable to your so called =B4global=B4 adversaries.
	That is inherent to tor=B4s design.
	=

	And by the way, =A8global=A8 here is of course vague and
	misleading. It is just a matter of getting enough traffic. =



>They have already
> cited various aspects to the openness of the design, the extensive
> scientific scrutiny to which it has been subject, etc. as evidence of
> this. =



	I understand that there is no design that can counter traffic
	analysis, but that doesnt excuse tor. =


	Tor is an =B4anonimity=B4 tool that can be easily subverted by any
	=B4adversary=B4 who collects enough data. That is part and parcel
	of the very desing of tor. So, sayig that tor is vulnerable BY
	DESIGN is a valid way of putting it. =

	=

	The trick is, as I previously mentioned, to mention that
	limitation...sometimes...and sometimes not. =


	Yes, yes. You have your papers. No, I doubt those papers are
	read by =B4ordinary=B4 tor users. =



>It's hard to imagine what would satisfy you at this point but
> perhaps this will help: I designed Tor with Roger and Nick. At all
> times we designed it to be as secure as we could given usability,
> performance, and other practicality goals (which are themselves
> security goals we considered, as has also been widely documented). At
> no point did we intentionally do anything to make the design less
> secure than we could think how to do while still making it as usable
> and practical as possible.


	You do realize that given the politics of the US government
	your claims are pretty shaky, no ? You are to be oh so
	trusted...because you say so? Come on. =


	Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. =


	=

> Nor did anyone ask any of us to do so, =


	It is a well known fact that the US government can
	compel its subjects to brazenly lie on matters of so called
	=B4national security=B4.

	Extensive cooperation between american firms helping the
	criminal activities of the US government has been widely
	published. =


	And you want people to believe that you, who are explicitly
	working for the US military, have not been influenced by them at
	all? =


	Again, such a very very extraordinary claim requres very
	extraordinary proof. =


	And yet, there is no proof to be seen. Except your words. =




> as
> far as I know. My opinion (subject to reasoned _scientific_ debate)
> about why the Tor design is more secure for practical attacks than
> those designed to be putatively more secure against a widescale
> attacker (such as those mentioned above) is sketched in "Why I'm not
> an entropist" 2009. That paper could use some updating and expansion,
> but the basic points hold up I believe.
> =

> > Its been 6 days already.
> =

> People have day jobs trying to design, build, and analyze systems to
> protect people. I often take way longer than that to respond to
> substantive well-reasoned questions, as do many people with jobs
> and/or lives. Such people also typically expect response times
> proportional to the importance, urgency, and reasonableness of the
> questions. To such people I say please do not infer too much to the
> fact that I have responded to all this in a mere 6 days.
> =

> aloha,
> Paul
> =

> > =

> > Regards,
> > =

> > Mark McCarron
> > =

> > > From: fuerschpiu@gmail.com
> > > Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 18:39:13 +0200
> > > To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
> > > Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Illegal Activity As A Metric of Tor
> > > Security and	Anonymity
> > > =

> > > Please Mccarron, =

> > > =

> > > The discussion is dead. You killed it yourself by not adding
> > > anything meaningful as far as I have seen. You just repeat
> > > yourself again and again as if it's a mantra. You got statistics
> > > to back up your claims? Good - show them! You got the script you
> > > used to track the onions? Awesome! Show it so we can see for
> > > ourselves and use it too! =

> > > =

> > > As others pointed out already: give us something to work with,
> > > else you can just pack up and troll another list as far as I am
> > > concerned. =

> > > =

> > > -- =

> > > 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
> >  		 	   		  =

> > -- =

> > 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

-- =

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

