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

Sean Lynch seanl at
Wed Jul 20 09:51:49 PDT 2016

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 2:59 PM juan <juan.g71 at> wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 11:44:16 +0300
> Georgi Guninski <guninski at> wrote:
> > Instead of only bashing tor, why not discuss the alternatives and move
> > to something allegedly better?
>         We need to get rid of tor first. Resources wasted on tor are
>         resources that can't be used in good projects.

They are not your resources to redirect, but the resources expended on Tor
are tiny compared to, say, Bitcoin. Or even just Ethereum. This is not a
good argument, and I think it may be motivated by your own personal
feelings about Tor. Which you are perfectly entitled to have, but you
should not be surprised when people who do not share those feelings don't
find your arguments based on them compelling.

> > 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)?
> > 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.
>         Of course it does. As a matter of fact tor cunts dingledine and
>         syverson are part of mit, or part of mit projects like
>         'dissent'.

So design your own?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 2261 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the cypherpunks mailing list