any moment now ...
measl at mfn.org
Mon Nov 29 16:20:20 PST 2010
On Mon, 29 Nov 2010, Justin Bull wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 5:56 PM, J.A. Terranson <measl at mfn.org> wrote:
> > Tor has been in LEA (FBI++) sights for a long time now - just as the
> > remailer system was under heavy scrutiny before it. I have zero doubt
> > that the fedz run many nodes.
> As a beginner in the crypto field, I thought Tor was actually quite secure.
> Seeing that is not the case, what is regarded as a safe, anonymous browsing
> practise? And, as far as I know, monitoring an exit node only reveals the
> destination address, not the sender... Is that really a security issue?
Certainly, however, that's not something Tor is really designed to mask -
Tor is designed to mask the people requesting services via Tor. While Tor
is likely quite secure in most respects, good intelligence does not
necessarily require that the content of any request be known: there are
many facets to any communication, and things like the existence of a
particular target is certainly usable intel. Tor is designed to inhibit a
number of attacks, including traffic analysis, but there is *no* absolute
guarantee that every possible attack is known, or even just coded for. If
your life relies on anonymity services, you will likely be a whole lot
more careful than if it's seen as something you "merely provide to others
on extra bandwidth".
"Never belong to any party, always oppose privileged classes and public
plunderers, never lack sympathy with the poor, always remain devoted to
the public welfare, never be satisfied with merely printing news, always
be drastically independent, never be afraid to attack wrong, whether by
predatory plutocracy or predatory poverty."
Joseph Pulitzer, 1907 Speech
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy