On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 10:00 +0200, Michiel de Jong wrote: > Pros of Tor: > - it is the only (or at least the most mature) option we know of to > not inadvertently disclose your geographical position. Since > freedombox is for a large part about privacy-by-design, that seems to > be a strong argument > - if freedombox has Tor on it, and a significant number of boxes get > sold and deployed, then freedombox is helping Tor (Tor only works well > if there are a lot of nodes), which i think is in itself good.
This is only true if some large part of those nodes are also Tor relays, contributing bandwidth back to the network. > - compared with the reverse proxy + ssl cert solution, it's more > decentralized. > > Cons of Tor: > - it might be too resource-heavy to run on some of the hardware (so > may make the default model more expensive) Tor runs on commodity routers and Android phones, so unless the Freedombox is expected to be a high-bandwidth relay, I think we're fine here. > - some people may consider running a Tor node illegal, and even if > it's not illegal, you will probably have to be prepared to deal with > take-down notices from your ISP. Of course, as more people run Tor > nodes, this burden is shared among more people, so putting it into > Freedombox would actually help to solve this problem. This is only true if the Tor nodes deployed in Freedomboxen are *EXIT* relays. You don't need to run as a relay or especially not as an exit relay to host a hidden service. > - Tor is a powerful tool, and every tool can be a weapon. I think its > merit as a tool outweighs its power as a weapon, but even so, i > wouldn't want to force other people to run a Tor node without properly > knowing what it is. Everybody has a right to understand (explained in > laymen's terms, if necessary) what software is running on the hardware > they own. So if we put Tor into freedombox, we should IMHO add some > documentation that explains "your freedombox will make your internet > connection into a channel of free speech for others, and may help > activists in suppressed regimes speak their mind without being > prosecuted.". So i would word it positively, but at least not make a > secret of how powerful the installed software of freedombox is. Simply > as a consumer's right (please don't flame me for this one). :) Again, this is only an issue if for some reason the default configuratin is to relay traffic, which is unnecessary for hosting a hidden service. Also, I question the necessity of an explanation that's so vague as to be not quite real. -- Sent from Ubuntu
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
