Tor, the pentagon's cyberweapon

[Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0]

On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 16:50:45 -0400
Karl <gmkarl at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10/13/20, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 <punks at tfwno.gf> wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 16:27:09 -0400
> > Karl <gmkarl at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 	Anyway, if you want something else to do, then figure out what a p2p
> > network that uses fill traffick would look like. See what kind of feedback
> > you get from the rest of the list....if you get any at all.
> 
> I'm more interested in actually starting work. 
> There's a ton of  research and talk about it.  

	there's indeed a ton of garbage 'papers' here (exactly what you'd expect from 'academic' parasites working for the govt)


	https://www.freehaven.net/anonbib/date.html

	I've taken a look at more than a few of them and apart from the ones that show that tor is a failure(for users, not for the pentagon of course), I didn't find any 'working solution'.


	as a side note and shockingly, a lot of the 'papers' are written by a small mafia 'led' by US military scum syverson. 


	also, there are things like i2p and freenet that seldom if ever get mentioned...



> If you want a start for an idea, how
> about an onion-router like tor, except each link has a set constant
> transfer rate.  


	well yeah you need onion routing and constant rate links, that much is clear...


> If you want more bandwidth, open another link to the
> same node, and spread bytes between them.
> 
> There's going to be some issue, and the plan could be adjusted to
> accommodate the issue.  It's most important to build it at this point.


	build without a plan and then get people to use some half-backed thing that would land them in jail. Good.