On 7 November 2014 05:39, Juan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 15:51:15 -0500 > "Jim Smith" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Usually you won't go through the trouble of using Tor unless your >> privacy is being attacked. Once you start using Tor it's easier to >> justify surveillance because of Tor's reputation. Now after all that >> you have to figure out how to be anonymous while doing business. We >> haven't mentioned how to avoid phone tapping, hidden microphones, and >> people following you in the streets. Tor is a very small piece to the >> privacy/anonymity puzzle. > > > So why would people be tracked in the first place? Are > you saying that the US government nazis track all of US > subjects all the time, and that's how they find people who run > 'hidden' services?
Well, I wouldn't want to rule anything out :) But in this case, we're talking about hidden services which proxied for drug dealers. Whatever your personal feelings about it, the war on drugs is a given. So the reality is that there are enormous intelligence and law enforcement operations targeting people in the drug trade. If one of them starts to operate (or do business with) a hidden service, is it so unlikely that that service could get caught up in the investigation? If anything, I'd have thought that the coordinated takedowns lend credibility to that argument - it's not like dealers would only do business through a single marketplace at a time. Compromise or turn a big dealer or two, and you'd probably be able to target a whole lot of marketplaces at once. I'm not saying that's what happened, just that it offers a plausible option that doesn't require additional tinfoil hattery beyond the norm. -J PS: I also think that it's a bit aggressive to describe anyone who offers discussion or argument as a "pentagon lackey". But then I'm probably one of them myself, right? :p -- tor-talk mailing list - [email protected] To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
