Delivery-Date: Sun, 03 May 2015 13:29:41 -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 4D7061E0402
	for <archiver@seul.org>; Sun,  3 May 2015 13:29:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D38234DD5;
	Sun,  3 May 2015 17:29:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ACA634DCC
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sun,  3 May 2015 17:29:34 +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 5ADbAepirfF0 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Sun,  3 May 2015 17:29:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-la0-x232.google.com (mail-la0-x232.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::232])
 (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 AAC7A34CD8
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sun,  3 May 2015 17:29:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by labbd9 with SMTP id bd9so91196902lab.2
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Sun, 03 May 2015 10:29:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
 :from:to:content-type;
 bh=51g1KBYhibRfXcCeQzK3zLlvYQCCAaEAJSxgSSrl2v0=;
 b=dPe9VI5DGzMjQ5WGWcI1PLnV7fJaMpuzLAc1lCnJOqnCx2dmzTEGh04npzy7kcEQlA
 URed0JQsu6dwylgRw0KpBwsCrvLk3+REK7fjFfj6X6NJI9FNrsaHyhmMiPJE186IJbzZ
 B2BB0U/pNe3vu43MZGG/oOzfkzfvCwOmW7a46s6dm0FDrY295q+6Oln5quEO14DOhpkF
 WTfFxdBvlvKijrtZiFW0Itx2LDVP0+DgVvMwLRWuciPO6GqiSmWPtj9OYmjLxB+LY7uH
 GC1PLghvKU5SrRADJ0Lwd7y2DE58QlLtlFdGFQZCODnWYlW7Z20I5PJQyJP1x5/eJB/b
 uBMQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.135.131 with SMTP id ps3mr16346517lbb.84.1430674170607; 
 Sun, 03 May 2015 10:29:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.27.6 with HTTP; Sun, 3 May 2015 10:29:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAMTdTS9mQhMKq+fqN7-GKMugnr3nhf_2a-FqUnr_H0txa4PA7g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5545929B.10805@riseup.net>
 <CAMTdTS9Jo4RYpQX+esro4pHO2zAG6gYTJWDsxsLeNaQ6A+026w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJVRA1S3tTX=hMDMrefvAWOT1Bi18zH_ztBGh8G+S_7hwodDEw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMTdTS-_BhHXb76-_US8gx6YdH2dpPmh4-D6utiBQghjaULrnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJVRA1SSz4rMw=S8yqyHkuakVyZbzAxLQFj_fAwG3xUCcSm90w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMTdTS9J65QtAPQtK+TAzQ4O=sPF9jxsRBhgZ6xX8svjC6_AHQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJVRA1S2Um0D=oM3bMf0RonowRDi41FVac=jprwuq9z+Cb8vwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMTdTS9mQhMKq+fqN7-GKMugnr3nhf_2a-FqUnr_H0txa4PA7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 May 2015 10:29:30 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: LYNpkncnMQjnfAQY2wGxyZvGfC0
Message-ID: <CAMTdTS9u9zqAB9eaGLC5T3NDLeQkxRKNo3O9jy=zE+eiWrw+mg@mail.gmail.com>
From: benjamin barber <barberb@barberb.com>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Meeting Snowden in Princeton
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>

forgive me for hurry typing.

On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 10:28 AM, benjamin barber <barberb@barberb.com>
wrote:

> Its already been discussed that VPN services and i2p are more secure for
> passing data unbeknownst to others, not even to mention the merits of the
> dir auths, and how they were being ddosed by lizard squad or were being
> seized.
>
>
> https://blog.torproject.org/blog/possible-upcoming-attempts-disable-tor-network
>
> AFAIK i have never heard the explanation behind the onymous arrests, but
> when the TOR leadership associates with Randi Harper and Lorrelai.
>
> In the end, we're all known by the company that we keep. Tor members seem
> to be making alot of ties to government and telecom, and associates with
> people like randi harper and lorrelai as well.
>
> Like i said in a previous thread, i was working on building tor hidden
> services, and now I no longer care to help tor at all, i'd rather wash my
> eyes with bleach, nice concept but wrong team and wrong implementation.
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 2:02 AM, coderman <coderman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/3/15, benjamin barber <barberb@barberb.com> wrote:
>> > Except that TOR says they're going to help LEO with stop cyber criminals
>> > according to briefings with UK parliament.
>>
>> what part of "Will never compromise Tor" do you not understand?
>> educating law enforcement does not equate to capitulating to calls for
>> backdoors or weaknesses.
>>
>> when the control port flaw was disclosed, a patch was committed within
>> 8 hours - while Tor people were on the road at a security conference.
>> this is a record turn-around for any defect i have been involved with.
>> in terms of technical measures for security, Tor has a great track
>> record - even compared to projects with ten times their resources.
>>
>>
>>
>> > Thats not to mean that Tor is a government honeypot but its not secure
>> > enough, but if the government makes tor popular people will not be
>> > persuaded to more effective models.
>>
>> Tor _is_ the most effective model deployed. there are a great many
>> ideas about making it even better, and i don't see how Tor being
>> popular precludes making it better.
>>
>> take a look at the datagram Tor related research to see just how
>> difficult / complicated some of these problems are.
>>  (userspace stacks, congestion controls, padding and reordering, etc... )
>>
>> pro-active security posture, prompt resolutions to serious security
>> issues, attentive to new research and actively engaged with
>> educational and professional organizations.
>>
>> any of these aspects speak well of Tor itself and the Tor Project around
>> it.
>>
>> perhaps disagreement based in technical merit should have been
>> requested. do you have any?
>>
>>
>> best regards,
>> --
>> 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

