[tor-dev] Effect of padding on end to end correlation false positive rate

[Juan]

On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 19:55:02 -0600
Mirimir <mirimir at riseup.net> wrote:


> > 
> > 	Really? Both use virtually the same robotic, military-like
> > 	language, full of pseudo technical garbage.
> 
> That's true. But there are many militaries. And although much of their
> technical allusion is over my head, what I do get makes sense.

	I think they also tend to post at the same time, but that's a
	pretty casual observation. Anyway, no big deal.


> 
> >> On the other hand, you do come off as a sock ;)
> > 
> > 	Go figure. And I counted you as an ally of sorts. So tell
> > 	me, whose 'sock'? 
> 
> I do consider you an ally, of a sort. And your perspective is
> valuable. But your unremitting nihilism has been getting to me. And
> it smells like sock to me.


	Oh, I'm pretty nihilistic about anything good ever coming from
	the US government, both from the 'public' part of it and from
	the 'private' part like facebook, intel or any other american
	firm. Granted, the rest of the 'free world' is hardly better. 

	I used to have a more 'mainstream' and bening view of the US
	'private' sector. But I know better now.

	But I'm not nihilitic about everything...yet =P



> 
> In particular, I also have concerns and reservations about Tor. It's
> true that the US military funded its development.

	I think the proper verb tense is present.


> And it's true that
> they probably still use it.
	
	that they use it is clearly stated in torproject.org 

	"who uses tor : military and law enforcement"


> 
> But maybe think of it this way: we have military-grade anonymity. 

	You have 'military grade' anonimity depending on who's your
	adversary (to use their military jargon)

	If your adversary just happens to be the military who created
	tor you only have problems. 

	And frankly, do you think the US military would shoot
	themselves in the foot by creating something that 'aids'
	'terrorists' and that they can't subvert? There's no reason for
	them to do that so it's safe to conclude that they didn't do it.


> And
> in any case, as far as I know, it's the best anonymity tool we've got.
> 

	Tool for what? If, for instance, you want to publish documents,
	isn't freenet a better alternative? 

	Freenet is truly p2p (unlike tor), the storage is
	decentralized (unlike tor) and the developers don't get
	millions of dollars from the pentagon (as far as I know). 

	Now, I wouldn't actually recomend freenet because I haven't
	done much homework regarding it, but at least it deserves a 
	mention I think.