[tor-teachers] Open, Onion and Off-the-Record == O3? Ozone?

[Paul Syverson]

On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 07:10:19PM +0000, Alison Macrina wrote:
> Nathan of Guardian:
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Nov 4, 2015, at 10:41 AM, J.M. Porup wrote:
> >> On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 10:23:38AM -0500, Nathan of Guardian wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015, at 10:02 AM, J.M. Porup wrote:
> >>>>>>> Perhaps, calling it Ozone, is too clever, but just using the phrase
> >>>>>>> "Open, Onion and Off-the-Record" is an easy meme that could stick?
> >>>>
> >>>> Having spent some (admittedly disagreeable) time in marketing, I would 
> >>>> encourage thinking less about clever/punny names and instead names that 
> >>>> "say what it is."
> >>>>
> >>>> I have found Don Norman's "The Design of Everyday Things" to be useful
> >>>> in this regard.
> >>>>
> >>>> The name should answer the question "What is it?" in a way that
> >>>> non-technical end users immediately understand...and in a way that they
> >>>> can easily communicate to others.
> >>>>
> >>>> I do not like to give criticism without offering an alternative, but I
> >>>> fear nothing comes to mind right now.
> >>>
> >>> Smart, considerate criticism is always welcome!
> >>>
> >>> Is "Open, Onion Routed and Off-the-Record" not saying what it is in
> >>> mostly plain english? I am happy with that longer version of the
> >>> description of "What is it?" or "Why do we recommend it?".
> >>
> >> One of the rules of thumb in advertising is to tout "benefits, not
> >> features."

This has bitten us in the past, e.g., Hidden Services are a narrow
description that has facilitated lots of ignorant press. For that
matter "anonymity" is something of a misnomer for what Tor provides
that has created mixed results. We were a bit pushed into using that
term wehn we introduced onion routing by people who felt it was a
version of something else that that they understoond. And most
important benefits are not always clear from the beginning, but then
you're stuck w/ the name or explaining a name change. There is always
a tension between something short and memorable that also conveys what
you want.  I like the O3 idea because it does a good compromise, and
in a layered way. Part of it is self-explanatory and other parts can
be explained (to the appropriate degeree) in a few words: e.g. onion
routing does for metadata what encryption does for data.

> >>
> >> For instance, many people who could benefit from using Tor don't need 
> >> to know how onion routing works under the hood (or even the phrase
> >> "onion routing".)
> >>
> >> Similarly, talking up "Open" as a feature may not resonate with a
> >> non-technical audience that likely knows little about open source
> >> software.
> >>
> >> Growing technical awareness will change your comms strategy as time
> >> passes, but I think the urgency of the message requires greater
> >> simplification for non-technical end users.
> >>
> >> Does that help?
> > 
> > Yes, good points. You are correct that using these kinds of terms only
> > appeals to people who understand the larger importance of them, as
> > opposed to how they directly impact them.
> > 
> > "Choice" is a better word then "Open", in that regard, and "No Trace" is
> > better than "Onion Routed". Thus, a phrase like "Your choose the
> > service, all conversations are completely private, and there is no trace
> > left behind", is much more plain spoken. 
> > 
> > I have also discovered "Zero Knowledge" again as an idea, and this
> > effort: http://zeroknowledgeprivacy.org/
> > 
> > "‘Zero-Knowledge’ privacy means the server is never capable of viewing
> > plaintext data; therefore, the data may never be compromised through
> > mismanagement, prying eyes, or external bodies looking to gain access."
> > 
> > Perhaps calling all of these things "Zero Knowledge Messengers" is an
> > easier starting point, and then explaining all the ways they achieve
> > that could be more useful.
> > 
> > 
> > I do think that Tor overall wants to raise awareness about what a "Dot
> > Onion" site is, means and does. "This chat service provides a dot onion
> > site" should hopefully mean something in the way that milk is labelled
> > "this milk contains no bovine growth hormone", or that a car contains
> > "anti-lock brakes" is something people generally get, now.
> 
> 
> I love this as a concept and I'm going to start brainstorming more
> marketable naming schemes, per Jens' suggestions. I do really like Zero
> Knowledge. Especially if we can get to a point where it's not just about
> what the server knows about you, but also about what it takes to get the
> service up and running. :)

What do I know, but I hate that usage. Perhaps because it's a wierd
distortion of "zero-knowledge" as the technical term that's been used
in crypto for many decades, perhaps because it oversells what is
provided, perhaps out of my fondness for long-gone ZKS.

aloha,
Paul