[tor-talk] Tor Summer of Privacy

[Juan]

On Mon, 6 Apr 2015 20:35:44 -0400
Paul Syverson <paul.syverson at nrl.navy.mil> wrote:


> 
> More details on the history at
> https://www.acsac.org/2011/program/keynotes/
> 
> > 
> > 	I mean we don't need to repeat yet again that tor is a
> > 	project of the US military. As such it doesn't make
> > 	sense for it to be 'decentralized'.
> 
> For the technical reasons behind the degree and nature of
> centralization and decentralization, see the above paper and the Tor
> design paper. Also note that ironically the first few major design
> versions made purely by govt. employees were actually more
> decentralized. E.g. see the above paper, also
> http://www.onion-router.net/Archives/TNG.html
> It was only when we moved to the Tor design, that we moved to being
> a bit less P2P with directory authorities. 


	And what point are you making with all that hand waving? 'a bit
	less p2p'? That's some technical language. 


> 
> For more technical arguments why this is in practice more secure than
> other designs known at the time see
>  http://freehaven.net/anonbib/#danezis-pet2008 and
>  http://freehaven.net/anonbib/#entropist


	Even assuming that the central servers are more
	'secure' (although that's vague - more secure for whom
	against what kind of attacks) the fact remains that centralized
	control over the network is something obviously in line with
	the political objectives of your employers. 

	


> 
> But by all means please continue justifying everything you say based
> on what you tenaciously are sure some large organizations must intend

	Is your contention that your employers don't have any purpose
	at all?  Or that the government responsible for a global
	surveillance system (among many other sick crimes) also pays you
	to counter them? lol 

	See, you can play that game only so far. You can pretend to be a
	'technician' who knows nothing about politics only so far.

	On the other hand I do realize that you are just playing a part
	here, for your audience of lackeys. 

	Obviously you are not going to admit that you are just a tool
	of the US military providing them with resources to 'spread
	democracy' in 'oppressed countries'.

	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_United_States_foreign_regime_change_actions

	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change

	


> rather than the technical design reasons that have been published and
> publically vetted by the best scientific and technical researchers on
> the planet


	Oh boy. Are you arrogant.

	By the way, have you and your friends received any national
	security letter lately?


> from the most respected advanced institutions in every
> country. What could they possibly add to the truly dizzying intellect
> manifest in your arguments to date?
> 
> Apologies to others for failing to resist feeding the troll. 


	
	So, you have nothing but name calling. And funnily enough whine
	about 'ad hominems'.  Unintentional self-parody at its best. 




> Guess I'm
> tired.  Here's a little ad hominem of my own: Moritz started it.
> 
> aloha,
> Paul
> 
> 
>