Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

Roger Dingledine writes: > I think finding ways to tie onion addresses to normal ("insecure web") > domains, when a service has both, is really important too. I'd like to > live in a world where Let's Encrypt gives you an onion altname in your > https cert by default, and spins up a Tor client by

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On 30 August 2017 at 19:18, Roger Dingledine wrote: > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 03:07:37PM +0100, Ben Tasker wrote: >> So his suggestion is portrayed as not sacrificing much, but actually >> sacrifices quite a lot. > > This is a really important point. Thinking of onion space right

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

This would also effect Onionshare’s user hosting anonymity, it would require file hosts to Reveal their identity or there onion address would keep changing. onionshare > On Aug 30, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Roger Dingledine wrote: > > This is a

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 03:07:37PM +0100, Ben Tasker wrote: > So his suggestion is portrayed as not sacrificing much, but actually > sacrifices quite a lot. This is a really important point. Thinking of onion space right now as the sum total of all that it can be is cutting off all of the future

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On 30 August 2017 at 16:35, Andreas Krey wrote: > On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 15:55:36 +, Jon Tullett wrote: >> On 30 August 2017 at 15:02, Andreas Krey wrote: > ... >> > Facebook is a house. Tor is a street. >> >> Ah, a motoring analogy. > > Not at all. You usually

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Joshua Case wrote: > > > On Aug 30, 2017, at 10:36 AM, Ben Tasker wrote: > > > > > > Yup, or, it's entirely successful in it's aim and none but the most > > determined can use the markets. Which results in the alienated

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

> On Aug 30, 2017, at 10:36 AM, Ben Tasker wrote: > > > Yup, or, it's entirely successful in it's aim and none but the most > determined can use the markets. Which results in the alienated users now > buying back off the street, getting a lower quality product and putting

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Alec Muffett wrote: > On 30 August 2017 at 15:19, Ben Tasker wrote: > > > > > Meanwhile, the drug-markets and other "vile" things he want to block will > > carry on unabated because a subset of their users will put

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 15:55:36 +, Jon Tullett wrote: > On 30 August 2017 at 15:02, Andreas Krey wrote: ... > > Facebook is a house. Tor is a street. > > Ah, a motoring analogy. Not at all. You usually don't even enter houses by car. Andreas -- "Totally trivial. Famous last

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On 30 August 2017 at 15:19, Ben Tasker wrote: > > Meanwhile, the drug-markets and other "vile" things he want to block will > carry on unabated because a subset of their users will put the effort in to > update a central resource weekly to note what the new address is. If

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Alec Muffett wrote: > On 30 August 2017 at 15:07, Ben Tasker wrote: > > > That's not quite the claim he's making though. He seems to be claiming > any > > "legitimate" (in his eyes) service shouldn't mind sacrificing

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On 30 August 2017 at 15:07, Ben Tasker wrote: > That's not quite the claim he's making though. He seems to be claiming any > "legitimate" (in his eyes) service shouldn't mind sacrificing their own > anonymity by being linked to a clearnet identity and becoming a "verified"

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Jon Tullett wrote: > > > Wll. Sure. Except that the proposal here claims to be making life > difficult for operators of illegal services without sacrificing any of > the anonymity and security goals of the project. That's not quite

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On 30 August 2017 at 14:45, Jon Tullett wrote: Hi Jon - in certain respects we have now hit the nub of the issue, repeated twice / in two similar ways: Version 1: Ethical stuff gets murky awful fast, and is so full of > strawmen. You're opposed to censorship? You must

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On 30 August 2017 at 15:02, Andreas Krey wrote: > On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:41:52 +, Jon Tullett wrote: > ... >> And yet Facebook itself actively engages in censorship, > > Facebook is a house. Tor is a street. Ah, a motoring analogy. Now we're back in my comfort zone! I have a

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On 30 August 2017 at 15:04, Alec Muffett wrote: > Hi Jon! > > On 30 August 2017 at 13:41, Jon Tullett wrote: > > First is that the technical advantages of Tor are not in question, and >> raising technical arguments in what quickly becomes an ethical

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:41:52 +, Jon Tullett wrote: ... > And yet Facebook itself actively engages in censorship, Facebook is a house. Tor is a street. A house can set house rules (although an argument can be made that facebook should not be able to, given its ubiquity). Streets shouldn't

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

Hi Jon! On 30 August 2017 at 13:41, Jon Tullett wrote: First is that the technical advantages of Tor are not in question, and > raising technical arguments in what quickly becomes an ethical debate > tends to polarize positions further. Did I do that? I don't think I

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On 30 August 2017 at 13:15, Alec Muffett wrote: > On 30 August 2017 at 10:51, Jon Tullett wrote: > >> Blog post refers: >> http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/773- >> Tor-and-the-Perfect-Storm.html >> >> Leaving aside the

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On 30 August 2017 at 10:51, Jon Tullett wrote: > Blog post refers: > http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/773- > Tor-and-the-Perfect-Storm.html > > Leaving aside the accusations of bias in the first part, what is the > view of the proposal to force hidden

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On 30 August 2017 at 12:13, I wrote: >> Separately, I'm personally curious about Tor's reputation. Sure, some >> people paint it as a wretched hive of scum and villainy, but how >> widespread is that view, and is it a concern to anyone involved with >> the project? Has

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

> Separately, I'm personally curious about Tor's reputation. Sure, some > people paint it as a wretched hive of scum and villainy, but how > widespread is that view, and is it a concern to anyone involved with > the project? Has it been studied/researched at all? > > -J It would be a good idea

[tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

Blog post refers: http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/773-Tor-and-the-Perfect-Storm.html Leaving aside the accusations of bias in the first part, what is the view of the proposal to force hidden services to rotate addresses? It appears to be philosophically anathema to Tor, and