The internet was intended to be a free and open space to share information, but tracking, surveillance, and censorship are widespread online.

Let's take back the internet.

Is this a reference to a specific event or demonstration at 34c3, a sybil attack on the tor network that Tor appears to be complicit in, or some other weaknesses introduced to the implementation?

I see some references to the cyber command mission statement in there and perhaps an allusion to Tor originating in the Department of the Navy. It's easy enough to see Tor as externalizing operations and white washing the reputation of an apparatus of the US military in order to disrupt alternatives and establish a monopoly on secure communications for a network that, while not wholly captive, the us military maintains enough nodes to influence quality of service to its own advantage and can harvest sufficient information from operations to capture other nodes through the legal system and prosecute any user arbitrarily. I'm not qualified to make a judgement as to whether that justifies a random verbal attack on someone who likely thinks they are doing something good, but if there's more specific information available, I'm interested

TL;DR - Tor is good enough for the crimes that form the typical strawman arguments against strong cryptography, but it's only good enough for dissidents if their dissension is aligned with the interests of the united states, as interpreted by us cyber command

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!