On 06/29/2016 08:36 PM, grarpamp wrote: > On 6/29/16, Mirimir <[email protected]> wrote: >> So who would use it? I'm guessing that everyone who uses Tor, I2P, etc, >> etc would use it. And so we'd be back to where we are now with Tor, with >> just the exception that the new system isn't vulnerable to global >> adversaries. >> >> How would you keep statist criminals from using it? > > When you have a non vulnerable network, or at least one that's > equally invulnerable to or exploitable by all participants, the > question of who uses it becomes more mooted by that balance.
True. > Today's overlay networks are vulnerable to GPA's, which at > this stage are just governments and global telecoms... not > end users. There's a big imbalance there, and it's not in > favor of said users. That's also true. But you take what you can get. >> There's still the criticism that Tor is intentionally vulnerable to >> global adversaries. Maybe it was at first, by design. But it's an >> open-source project. > > Best design principles vs adversaries, as school of thought > over a decade ago, are certainly different than what would > be designed in 2017. There's room for something new. I totally agree. What about Dissent?[0] Also funded by DARPA ;) What do you see as promising? [0] http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2015/10/192387-seeking-anonymity-in-an-internet-panopticon/fulltext
