Instead of only bashing tor, why not discuss the alternatives?

[Rayzer]

On 07/19/2016 02:12 AM, stef wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 11:44:16AM +0300, Georgi Guninski wrote:
>> Instead of only bashing tor, why not discuss the alternatives and move
>> to something allegedly better?
>>
>> Certainly some advanced attack and/or backdoor will screw them all.
>>
>> For a start, I would like to know:
>>
>> 1. What are alternatives to tor (possibly with less functionality)?
> from the top of my head:
> dissent,
> riffle,
> i2p,
> mixminion
> pynchon-gate
> percy++
>
>> 2. Is the alternative known to be in bed with shady stuff like TLAs?
>> 3. Did they have braindamaged bugs (like debian's openssl memset())?
>> 4. What is their security/anonymity bug history?
>> 5. To what attacks they are known to be vulnerable?
>> 6. To what attacks they are conjectured to be immune?
>>
>> As an aside, I heard critique of Riffle: MIT are allegedly in bed with
>> USA. Don't know it this makes sense or not.
>>
> ---end quoted text---
>

dissent,
riffle,
i2p,
mixminion
pynchon-gate
percy++

NONE of these are intended for the same target audience as tor. IOW NONE
of the above could CONCEIVABLY be used by a journalist or
computer-illiterate dissident in Tanzania right NOW.

And honestly, imho, I2P is probably just a compromises as tor, but it's
so much more fucking obuscurant, to hide that possibility. I tried using
it for a while. Fucking useless and continues to be so.

No one's mentioned Retroshare. It seems a likely candidate.

Rr

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20160719/7caf778c/attachment-0003.sig>