On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 01:52:11 -0600 Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote:
On 07/19/2016 03:38 PM, juan wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 03:40:20 -0600 Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote:
On 07/19/2016 03:15 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
The dawning inescapable realisation that "he's right" and was right all along about Tor Inc.
Well, I wouldn't go that far ;)
If Tor were actually secure, I could accept that US government uses it for evil.
So Mirimir, what's the problem here? Am I failing to explain fuckingly basic facts or are you playing dumb?
Tor IS actually secure IF YOU ARE THE FUCKING US MILITARY. If on the other hand you are one of their TARGETS then tor IS NOT SECURE.
Is something unclear?
What's your evidence for that? I doubt that it's technical, from what you've shared.
It certainly is 'technical', pretty basic, and you must be as aware of this just as I am, so I don't understand why you want me to repeat it. Trolling? Bah. But here it goes again! Pay fucking attention. The US military is a 'global adversary' - they have enough taps on cables, exchanges, ASs, whatever, to be able to deanonimize tor users. Especially so called 'hidden' services. On the other hand, people like, say, Ross Ulbricht, don't have taps on the global fiber infrastructure, don't have access to IXPs, can't hack routers, etc. Get that? Furthermore the only psychos who have that level of access to the 'infrastructure' are the syverson psychos, the US military. The US military can spy on all the planet - no other national government can do that. That why they can safely use tor, and no one else can.
So it sounds like just an assumption.
It's the same argument that we make about encryption generally.
No it is not. You are *misaplying* the argument.
Systems with backdoors can't be secure. And you can't keep anyone from using anonymity systems without backdoors.
Yes you can if access to the backdoor requires capabilities that your enemies don't have.
That's the fallacy about backdoors ;)
No fallacy. YOU ARE MISAPPLYING THE ARGUMENT.
So are you arguing that well-designed backdoors are OK?
They can be OK, and I don't care for any 'general theory' about backdoors anyway - I'm just talking about or. The 'backdoor' in tor is simply the fact that the US military has sabotaged the internet.
Or are you just arguing that US military are dumb enough to think so.
I don't think they are the dumb ones here...
That they're so confident about their superior capabilities?
Yep. There's nothing surprinsing about that.
As I understand Juan's position, that wouldn't work for him.
What wouldn't work?
Let's assume, hypothetically,
Sorry Mirimir, if you first acknowledge facts, then I might entertain your hypotheticals.
that Tor is secure for everyone. And let's acknowledge that US military uses it for evil.
Are you trolling me?
If that were so, would you use and recommend Tor?
Or would you reject it, because it's used for evil?