Tor Stinks: TorrentFreak: Movie Companies Want VPNs to Log User Data and Disconnect Pirates

[Steven Schear]

The Nym network, based on Loopix, should operational very soon.

https://nymtech.net/docs/overview/network-privacy/


On Wed, Sep 1, 2021, 8:11 AM jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 07:22:00 PM PDT, grarpamp <grarpamp at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> On 8/31/21, jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > TorrentFreak: Movie Companies Want VPNs to Log User Data and Disconnect
> Pirates.
> >
> https://torrentfreak.com/movie-companies-want-vpns-to-log-user-data-and-disconnect-pirates-210830/
>
> Hollywood US movies suck ass, downhill quality since
> decades. China etc also owning more of Hollywood.
>
> Stupid pirate scene hasn't evolved much since
> days of FTP... some crews are still using it, lol.
> They advanced to decrypt Blu-Ray and DVD, screencap,
> etc... but still hardly taking distribution seriously.
>
> [delete]
>
> >Unfortunately, Tor Project is fixated on disallowing its
> users any freedom to make their own tradeoff choices
> as to how to use and deploy its [formerly] flexible overlay
> software as such... with that Tor Project is destroying
> users ability to share freely as they see fit. That is quite
> bad for enabling of freedom, the very thing Tor Project
> claims to be about. The Tor Project is arbitrarily censoring
> its own protocols, revoking features, against the needs of
> its users, pontificating and claiming ultimate authority over
> "security" vs users right to make knowledgeable use case
> tradeoffs, and censoring users who make that case.
> Hypocrites.
>
> >tor should be forked, and v2 onions maintained therein,
> until other mass distribution solutions are developed.
>
>
> Jim Bell's comment:
>
> Well over a year ago, I suggested a substitute for the TOR anonymization
> network.  Not a replacement:   Another system, in addition to TOR, to be
> used if somebody wants that.
>
>  Not that I, a person generally not knowledgable about the details of such
> anonymization networks, know of any specific failures or weaknesses.   It's
> just that I have generally read, occasionally, that people can worry about
> the potential for mischief, especially since the funding for TOR tends to
> come from either the US Federal Government or, by now, funding by
> educational institutions that are somehow beholden to that same Federal
> government.
>
> Things were changing.  For example, Centurylink had begun offerring
> optical-fiber Internet service, with a speed of 940 megabits/second.  But
> it was much more important that they were offering an unlimited monthly
> data, up from the 1 terabyte limit common there and elsewhere.  'Unlimited
> data' is good if you want to build a network that uses chaff, meaningless
> traffic that obscures not only the meaning of communication, but even the
> existence of communication.  Chaff would cost money to send, or at least
> use up part of a fixed allocation of monthly data.  If there's no limit,
> there's no extra cost.
>
> I proposed that a new network be build, using the Raspberry Pi 4
> computer.  Not that I'm somehow attached to that design:  Not at all,
> merely that it was new, and it apparently had plenty of power and features
> to accomplish the task.   At the time, it was available for about $85 in
> single-piece quantity, substantially less in large quantity.   Due to
> inflation, it's somewhat more expensive now.
>
> I also suggested that perhaps every node should, potentially, be able to
> be an exit node.  But with a difference:  Being an exit node might be
> legally tenuous, in large part because 'suspicious' traffic could emerge
> from it.  My idea is that all output traffic be encrypted, at least enough
> so that if such traffic is monitored by a hostile entity (e.g. a
> government) all they could see is that seemingly random data is emerging.
> The decrypt key would be delivered from another node.
>
> I'd say there's no less reason today to implement an alternative
> anonymization system today, than a couple of years ago.  The cost seems to
> be small, maybe a subsidy per node of $35 per month, enough so that a
> person can upgrade to a 940 mbit/second service.   Or a total of  about
> $420,000 per year for 1000 nodes.
>
>             Jim Bell
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 7475 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20210901/6aca8f8d/attachment.txt>