On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 00:26:13 -0400
grarpamp <grarp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 4:00 PM, juan <juan....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > so it's a plain 'scientific' fact that there is no 'illegal'
> > content hosted in any 'hidden' service, and so it is a plain
> > scientific fact that the tor network is a complete
> > failure...
> >
> > ...if we assume that that tor network is not a US military
> > honeypot (which of course it is).
> >
> > what's going on with tor 'hidden' services?
>
> Tor's hidden services are vulnerable to at least two published
> deanonymization attacks. At least one of those is not fixable
> under tor's current design / accomodations made to users.
> There is "illegal" content on tor's hidden services, same
> with clearnet, so this means nothing.
No that's not true. There's barely any 'illegal' content on
clearnet, and there's just as much 'illegal' content on tor.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/canary_in_a_coal_mine
As I said, the obvious conclusion is that tor's hidden services
are a complete failure, because people who use them to publish
'illegal' content end up in jail. But 'failure' is not the most
accurate word here. 'Honeypot' is.
And I am talking of course about 'illegal' content as deemed
by the worst scumbags on the planet - the US government - the
same scumbags who fund and own tor.
So grarpamp, where's are the link to the 'uncensored'
stuff on the 'dark web' 'powered' by tor's 'hidden' services?
Did you bring up this issue on tor's mailing list? Have those
champions of anti-censorship already censored you? Or maybe
they didn't censor you because you toe their party line?
> There are things tor the sw is good and bad about, same for tor the
> org, tor the funding, tor the history, etc, so evaluate and operate
> appropriately. And / or contribute to and use whatever other
> overlays / systems liked, or wished to create.
> Unknown why that reply re the multiple shitstains playing the
> "hidden wiki" of long ago gone.
Not sure what you mean by that.
