On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 10:25:12 -0700 Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote:
On 08/08/2018 11:01 PM, juan wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 20:44:53 -0700 Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote:
Anyway, I vaguely recall proposed higher-latency mix networks that would be usable for browsing, remote management, etc. But I haven't heard that any are actually getting implemented.
so?
So? Well, if they're not being implemented, they're not very useful.
not useful for what?
You can fume all you want about some ideal that ought to exist. But that alone doesn't really help much.
you mean, discussing the 'technical details' doesn't 'help' whereas US military propaganda 'helps'? Well, of course, that's true, depending on what is being 'helped'...
And yeah, I know that they're not being implemented because those Americunt fascists are so damn good at propaganda. I do tend to agree with you about that.
oh, that's nice =) (just in the highly unlikely case that you are trying to mock me, bear in mind that the joke is on you =) ).
But that's not the only reason. There's also the latency vs usability tradeoff.
Which I think I acknowledged...
Or even if it is, maybe you ought to be promoting them?
And what am I doing here?
But not Freenet! That shit is ~20 years out of date. More below.
Keep trolling. So decentralized storage is 20 years out of date whereas using php to serve files behind a low quality proxy is the 'technology' of the next americunt century. by the way, freenet is 18 years old and your employer the tor corporation is 15 years old. So I guess tor is 'almost' ~20 years out of date? And you know, there's even older stuff than freenet, like the p2p networks based on gnutella and they are of course superior to bittorrent, let alone to 'web based' 'solutions'.
Not sure if you are keeping track of the 'issue' here. As far as I'm concerned the 'issue' is not BROWSING THE FUCKING WEB but doing 'cryptoanarchy' 'stuff'
Huh? Just what the fuck else is "'cryptoanarchy' 'stuff'" then?
We were talking about assasination politics. And you barefacedly declared that tor was 'good enough' for end users, 'good enough' for hidden services, and 'good enough' for killing trump. So here the 'crypto anarchy stuff' is AP. Now, are you trolling or what? You can't remember the topic of the discussion from one message to the next? Or?
There are web sites. There's email. There are various more-or-less P2P messaging systems. There's SSH for managing servers.
I agree that email and messaging would better resist compromise if they used higher-latency mix networks. Even very high-latency ones, with lots of padding.
Not just email, but any protocol that doesn't require 'instant' messages. Which I imagine includes AP.
But SSH via nested VPN chains plus Tor is painful enough as it is. I can't imagine waiting minutes between typing and remote action.
What have I missed?
good thing that at least you are asking. Now try to answer your question.
Well, I was hoping for some constructive discussion. But that's hard with you. But whatever, we are what we are.
You are expecting me to provide something that doesn't exist and can't exist? And since nobody can provide a fast and secure network, you just keep parroting tor propganda? Well I guess that's your job description?
Yes, basically. Tor was developed by the US military. But that's not likely why privacy activists embraced it.
yes it is - 'privacy' 'activists' 'embraced' it because the fucking US military promoted it.
again, here's a link for you
http://www.monitor.upeace.org/innerpg.cfm?id_article=816
that's commie 'anarchist' appelbaum who got US$ 100k per year to promote a tool used by the US govt to promote coups in the middle east.
Indeed. Tor was announced on _this list_ :)
...not entirely sure what your remark means? Anyway, hopefully the reason why tor is so 'popular' is clear enough by now. But I guess you are still ignoring the reason for tor to exist. It is for americunt nazis to promote 'democracy' in 'repressive' regimes.
And seriously, are you following the published literature on overlay networks?
No. I'm following tor propaganda by you and grarpamp in lists like this one.
yes, ask all the people who are in jail thanks to tor. Or dead.
Yeah, yeah. But nothing's perfect. And consider how many more would be jailed or dead if they _hadn't_ used Tor.
Less people. You don't do stupidly risky things if you know you are getting caught. You do them when you drink the koolaid from the US military like Ulbricht did.
What's a problem is _too much_ overhead.
you are just bullshiting and hand waving.
No, I'm not. Go read the fucking papers, if you don't believe me.
I don't believe what? It's obvious that more secure stuff has tradeoffs. And it's obvious that the more secure stuff doesn't get promoted for political reasons.
Open-source software is hardly driven by "assholes at the top".
what - are you referring to the fact that tor is open source? So fucking what. It is developed and controlled by military scum like syverson and the little tor mafia. Who by now must have gotten 10 MILLION DOLLARS for their 'work'.
So what? Is poverty your ideal or something?
lol - you are not only a govt agent, but a troll =) So your ideal is to steal 10 millions from taxpayers and dollar holders so that the worst scum on the planet like your pal syverson builds a fake anonimity network for the US military. Your ideal is the most toxic kind of americunt fascism. At least be upfront with that.
As soon as an adversary joins your network, they can trace data movement. So they can show that your node has handled pieces of illegal files, identified by hash.
uh yeah, that's how freenet works. You have encripted pieces of stuff that can be anything.
That's where you're wrong. If an adversary is in your Freenet network,
what do you mean, 'in your network'?
they see all those encrypted pieces of stuff. And if they're running a suitably modified version of the Freenet software, they know which of those pieces are part of which files. Because they can fetch each file of interest, and decompose the process of decryption and file assembly.
And, being part of the network, they know which pieces they get from your node, and which pieces they send to it. That is, they know what files you're handling.
and your source for that claim is?
And even though they can't really prove that you accessed those files, they can say in court that they can, and you'll be hard pressed to convince a jury otherwise.
that may be how your nazi legal system works - you can be charged with anything and convicted without proof. That's not freenet's fault.
You could say the same about Tor ;)
but tor is technically inferior to decentralized storage. I'm just pointing out that freenet is superior in some key ways, like being decentralized and not funded by the enemy. Doesn't mean I'm selling freenet though, which I am not.
anyway, it's quite funny that you robotically ignore all of tor's problems and are barefaced enough to badmouth the competition....
Dude, I don't ignore Tor's problems! Where we differ is that I'm willing to work around them.
So how do you work around tor problems?
And seriously, recommending Freenet is far^N worse than recommending Tor.
Well, far^0 = 1, far^-1 = 0.1 etc
are you drunk or something? Again WHO gives a fuck about 'browsing the web'? Why would cypherpunks be interested in 'anonymously' reading the jew york times? Which is something you can do with any free vpn anyway.
There's a lot more on the web than commercial media and shit.
sure - so link some of it - oops - as usual you have no evidence for your claims? =)
yes. I can directly tell you to go fuck yourself. That's actually better.
Yeah, well, we know that :) But I don't care. All I care about is pointing out the weaknesses of your arguments. As a public service.
Oh that's fine. Because the real public service is your tor proganpada being exposed for what it is =) Remember, three days ago you made this propaganda claim : "Adequate anonymity for assassins is a much harder problem. However, evidence from .onion marketplaces and child porn forums also suggests that Tor would be good enough. " completely shameless are you?