request for transcript: Bruce Schneier and Eben Moglen discuss a post-Snowden Internet

[Juan Garofalo]

--On Monday, December 16, 2013 12:06 AM -0500 Ted Smith <tedks at riseup.net>
wrote:

> On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 00:40 -0300, Juan Garofalo wrote:
>> > said another way, breaking Tor at protocol level is currently too
>> > expensive a solution 
>> 
>>         And you know that, how, exactly?
> 
> All of the most recently leaked documents pertaining to Tor (from 2007
> to 2011 IIRC) 

	'if you recall correctly'? 

	Are you aware that this is the end of the year 2013, by the way? 

	Do I need to mention again that tor developers admit that traffic can be
analyzed? 

	Why on earth do you believe that "absence of (outdated)evidence is
evidence of absence"? 



> treat it as far too expensive. These documents are largely
> congratulatory for Tor, and most of the fears of the research community
> (correlation attacks in particular) are as yet unrealized.


	What if you actually read my messages instead of repeating the same
unfounded assertions I've already replied to? 


> 
> As coderman says, there are a wide variety of lucrative active attacks
> that the NSA is not shy about using. Given these attacks, there's no
> reason to try to become a global passive adversary


	Àre you joking? There's no reason for the NSA to be the NSA? 

	the hell are you talking about. 


> or implement
> correlation attacks. You don't need a correlation attack if you've owned
> your target's computing platform with a 0day or several.

	They can do both . And actually, owning the target's computer may be
harder than monitoring the tor network, depending on circumstances.



> 
> To respond to another comment of yours:
> 
> 
>>         Also, given the fact that the american nazi government has
>> influenced and
>> bribed virtually everybody in the 'security' 'community', isn't it an
>> obvious educated guess that Tor, which is directly funded by the
>> american
>> nazi governemnt is, let's say, not so trustable? 
> 
> Virtually all academic computer science in the United States is
> government-funded; Tor isn't substantially different.


	So? Virtually all academic computer science in the US is corrupt. That
isn't news. 


> 
> Further, the Tor developers include people whom the US Government is
> openly hostile towards (Jacob Applebaum), and are generally very
> principled people. 

	So? Applebaum may not get along with the US government, doesn't mean
anything, considering that the other developers are rather friendly to the
US government.

	For fuck's sake they work for the FUCKING US MILITARY.

> 
> What is your source for the "fact that the american government has
> influenced and bribed virtually everybody in the security community"?
> 


	"common sense"




> -- 
> Sent from Ubuntu
>