[Noisebridge-discuss] Anti-piracy / anti-Pirate Bay law currently in Congress

[Andy Isaacson]

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 01:04:15AM -0500, Thomas Stowe wrote:
> Wow, the only assertion I made was that TOR is compromised and you basically
> just told everyone to completely ignore what I've said.

Well, you're making a "balance of the evidence" factual statement, that
you think that Tor is compromised.  We're arguing that there's
significant evidence that it's not, under a reasonable set of
assumptions.

Your exit node concerns are well taken -- if you're worried about the
possible consequences of misinformed law enforcement, then your personal
choice not to run a Tor exit node is your choice.  You can still
contribute to the cause of online anonymity by running a bridge, or a
router node with "Deny *" exit policy.

> identities. I didn't state that there is one, I said that there I don't
> trust it and there might possibly be one.

It's true, there might be a flaw.  Even software written and widely
reviewed by some of the best engineers in the world has flaws --
CVE-2010-3301 being my current favorite object lesson.

Wildly gesticulating isn't an argument, though.  If you find a flaw,
please publish it (or describe it to someone who can fix it).  If you
don't have a flaw -- nor even the vague outlines of a theory as to what
the flaw actually *is* -- then saying "it exists!" is unhelpful.

> I sometimes wonder if people think that poking fun at my signature or
> stating that it's idiotic means a damned thing beyond that they were pretty
> much mentally masturbating to the fact that they could insult the fact that
> I have it in my e-mails.

Actually, I'm genuinely curious why you include it, and merely pointed
out that it's nonsensical to be helpful in case you were under the
mistaken impression that it was of legal force.

-andy