<quote name="Marc A. Pelletier" date="2014-01-13" time="12:27:11 -0500"> > The scenario I am trying to explain is that which starts from the given > premise: "Assume a person under continual surveillance." TOR offers no > protection against that scenario, privacy pundits notwithstanding.
Sure, and even more explicit: given the resources of most states, a 'person of interest' wouldn't be able to edit WP without them knowing, so why care? That's a strawman (both your statement and mine). We should care about the bigger majority who are just being caught up in the generalized dragnet of surveillance, which we can do something about. Let's prevent them from connecting the dots and finding a new person of interest. > > Plus, it sounds a bit like a > > variation of the "I have nothing to hide" argument to me, to which I > > couldn't disagree more with. > > No, it does not. > > What I *am* saying is that if you place your freedom or life in danger > by editing Wikipedia then TOR only provides very limited protection at > best, and the scenarios where that is not the case are already > adequately covered with IPBE. I think you're talking past each other here. :/ > It it worthwhile to try and give as much privacy as possible for people > under repressive regimes? On moral grounds, without doubt. But those > are rare an exceptional circumstances, and the cost of opening the door > to abuse is high. By definition, any real solution will be involved, > hard to get right, and expensive (in time and resources). Like everything we do at WMF/in the Wikimedia community. Greg -- | Greg Grossmeier GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E | | identi.ca: @greg A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D | _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
