On 07/23/2017 02:52 PM, z9wahqvh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 9:51 PM, Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn@rushpost.com <mailto:skquinn@rushpost.com>> wrote:
Maybe funded, as in past tense. The current Tor project is not dependent at all on US government funding that I can see. If you can prove otherwise, please post the proof.
proof is right there on Tor's own site. there is still substantial US government funding. according to the Tor Project "Sponsors" page (https://www.torproject.org/about/sponsors.html.en <https://www.torproject.org/about/sponsors.html.en>), current funders include:
-- the Open Technology Fund (https://www.opentech.fund/page/faq <https://www.opentech.fund/page/faq>), a subsidiary of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (http://www.bbg.gov/, https://www.bbg.gov/who-we-are/mission/ <https://www.bbg.gov/who-we-are/mission/>), a long-time sponsor of Tor, and the US government agency that sponsors the various "Radio Free" projects and has deep ties to CIA and other parts of the intelligence apparatus; -- the National Science Foundation, the science funding body of the Federal government.
So strictly speaking, I was a bit off the mark. However, I think neither the OTF nor the NSF are able to exert the kind of pressure that #$%&#$ was asserting to be the reason that there is no chaff-filled network feature in Tor. And it still means #$%&#$ was probably wrong on this statement:
which makes sense, since the CIA, DIA, DOD and NSA fund the creation of the Tor network
but of course the conspiracy theorists and the people like #$%& who insist I work for the US government (a huge laugh given my past, BTW) are going to say that NSF money and CIA/DIA/DOD/NSA money are the same, yada yada yada, bullshit bullshit bullshit (to the tune of The Battle Hymn of the Republic).
NSF is pretty basic-science oriented and the grants that funded those are publicly available & probably not for general operating funds.
Right. In other words, it's not laundered NSA money to put a subtle backdoor in despite what #$%& is going to try to tell us. Glad we're clear on that.
also of note is that while that page says US State Dept funding ended in 2016, for some reason it remains listed under "Current sponsors." hard to tell what "current" means since the page isn't dated. at any rate, State was still a funder as of the latest annual Financial Report.
This is the one that worries me a bit. Now I'd rather the State Department not fund Tor, but the timing of the drop-off says a lot. (Hint: What happened at the end of 2016?) -- Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn@rushpost.com> http://www.rantroulette.com http://www.skqrecordquest.com