On July 21, 2016 2:26:18 AM EDT, juan <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 01:52:11 -0600
>Mirimir <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 07/19/2016 03:38 PM, juan wrote:
>> > On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 03:40:20 -0600
>> > Mirimir <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > 
>> >> On 07/19/2016 03:15 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>> >>> The dawning inescapable realisation that "he's right" and was
>> >>> right all along about Tor Inc.
>> >>
>> >> Well, I wouldn't go that far ;)
>> >>
>> >> If Tor were actually secure, I could accept that US government
>> >> uses it for evil.
>> > 
>> >    So Mirimir, what's the problem here? Am I failing to explain
>> >    fuckingly basic facts or are you playing dumb? 
>> > 
>> >    Tor IS actually secure IF YOU ARE THE FUCKING US MILITARY.
>> > If on the other hand you are one of their TARGETS then tor IS NOT
>> >    SECURE.
>> > 
>> >    Is something unclear? 
>> 
>> What's your evidence for that? I doubt that it's technical, from what
>> you've shared. 
>
>       It certainly is 'technical', pretty basic, and you must be
>       as aware of this just as I am, so I don't understand why you
>       want me to repeat it. Trolling? Bah.
>
>       But here it goes again! Pay fucking attention.
>
>       The US military is a 'global adversary' - they have enough taps
>       on cables, exchanges, ASs, whatever, to be able to deanonimize
>       tor users. Especially so called 'hidden' services. 
>
>       
>       On the other hand, people like, say, Ross Ulbricht, don't have
>       taps on the global fiber infrastructure, don't have access to
>       IXPs, can't hack routers, etc. Get that?

I agree, sadly. I still think it's interesting tech though.

John

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Reply via email to