Delivery-Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 06:56:18 -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=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,
	T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD,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 DD2321E049C
	for <archiver@seul.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 06:56:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 463F534376;
	Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:56:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5AC1342F9
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:56:09 +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 j0D4bvJsdNBX for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:56:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ob0-f181.google.com (mail-ob0-f181.google.com
 [209.85.214.181])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F6CE320B4
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:56:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by obcwp4 with SMTP id wp4so659420obc.4
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 03:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to
 :content-type;
 bh=ylbpSRZZqh+R1xkzxBCi5iEz344H9eZ1TfhsE1pGQzQ=;
 b=h5za7VwT1yBU6OOq9Q+TL12N82l8PqoMUJvx8AMU5g7PBr8XvHO+U/cKBGZYCNITYG
 1rP1Dvl0oyXGXuYfyP9c2MEjlVjjND18DZJGrXjLZYtxF10nuzvR1hrQC7Y9yZTFpi54
 euYT4M8RUm6dczQh7MRX0MBXiW4R1uqOS9zDYDDadxoVNCUV8l/b7KhAiaGaeO1/uM++
 6itxx1BJg4dSInBylazZyI6bgtkMDf4CX1ku8uDC2kKXBQmdVhkxb4WEH0SlNaMRDvs1
 HrfErkQ8hOoNXH5cUBovqOn8bdsxq+nUoEYZvmZ+lOW3CidpHsgkbFnti5dX5fct2UnX
 FiSQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkK3dx+BBLsWN0zeulDZMHj4XKq0OZH1pcCisX1ZEIe7PmwTS5+j8B0WdouPOTbtIh1jsQt
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.160.203 with SMTP id xm11mr25462574oeb.85.1425984967131; 
 Tue, 10 Mar 2015 03:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.102.163 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 03:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [86.141.72.68]
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:56:07 +0000
Message-ID: <CABMkiz5egHsJOFvuxtuS9OLutruYH0=6N6G7vQiVwKwC0xOBKA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ben Tasker <ben@bentasker.co.uk>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: [tor-talk] (UK) Parliamentary advice on 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>

Interesting reading  - the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology
(POST) has published it's report on Tor and the (in)feasibility of blocking
anonymous access for users within the UK.

The document's a PDF, and the layout is questionable, but it's worth a read
if you have 5 minutes.

http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/POST-PN-488/the-darknet-and-online-anonymity
http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/POST-PN-488.pdf

There are some interesting insights in there, from the perspective of what
LEA's see.

The overall summary though is - blocking anonymous access wholesale is not
an acceptable policy option in the UK, and would impact on non-criminal Tor
users. There _might_ be more appetite for legislating against Hidden
Services, but enforcing it would be technologically infeasible.

-- 
Ben Tasker
https://www.bentasker.co.uk
-- 
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

