I'm interested in helping you guys with Tor development. I don't really care what I work on, except I do not support .onion websites (though I am willing to be convinced otherwise) so I would prefer not to participate directly in their development. I have plenty of experience with writing code
Folks in convo before have covered some of these areas and more that one could surely find or think of...
Philosophical...
Why does someone want to support and develop for Tor, or any other overlay p2p anonymity network, or crypto, for that matter? When even a fix to the manpage could be read and used by onion users and operators, same for metrics, lists, or any other part of the ecosystem. Does one fear "bad" things, association, or support "good" things? Does freespeech, anonymity, privacy, human rights sound "good"? What is "bad"? Censorship? Theft, Dictatorships, Police States, whether one's own, that of the Enemy, or that of the Oppressed? Cryptocurrency, anonymity, free markets, privacy, messaging... "bad"? "Good" [only] when used to defeat "bad" things inside or outside of [mal]functional democracies that assert majority force over minorities who have forced no one? Ricochet, Signal, GPG... "bad"? New technology that forces change over old entrenched ways... "bad"? Are anonymous forums where professional therapists give pro bono counseling to even the most reviled, depraved, criminal, socially scarlet lettered and outcast... "bad"? Materials and talk of religion? Are datamining, traffic archiving, exploits, cleartext... "good"? Tor has exits... do people realize how much of both what they like to "support", and abhor, travels over those exits? The variety of traffic there is no different than onions. Should exits be unsupported? What about the internet, or printing presses, should those tools be unsupported? Are they "bad", get their makers looked askew? Onions, exits, internet, presses, hammers... all simply agnostic tools. Tools can be used to build great things, to defend, or to wield in bloody murder. And what of biases over certain agnostic tools instead of over the separate "good" or "bad" uses of them? Do other tool builders and users have to wonder if their tools are being compromised by those with such biases? What of when those with biases end up needing the tools themselves, what will be the tool quality, or their ability to do "good" with them? Have people taken the time to explore the onion space to find and participate in all the "good" things they like therein, to create and grow them, or even engage in counsel and advocacy against the "bad"? What tools would be needed to do that?
Yes, people are free to work on what they like... including giving deep thought as to what they like and don't, and why, and how supporting agnostic tools can actually fit with that.
Are not your pens tools? Who likes those? Who supports those? What if they didn't? Pens... write code.
Tech, fun, politic...
Amounting to consideration feature X may prevent or diminish a better archictecture on balance for some higher importance feature Y. That should be covered open devops as usual.
Or if the *technology* or *code* of eg: eepsites onions, or other subsets of various projects are not in their interest or knowledge practice area. Ok.
Or if the features provided by any overlay network or tool are deemed flawed, and the technical or political effort to get them fixed, or rearchitecture, or correctly advertised, or called out within as bunk, is too high, therein it may be better to abandon them and or speak out freely as such.
On 2018-01-10 11:22:22 at +0000, Beastr0 beastr0@protonmail.com wrote:
I don't really care what I work on, except I do not support .onion websites (though I am willing to be convinced otherwise) so I would prefer not to participate directly in their development.
[...] Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
On 2018-01-11 18:36:21 at +0000, grarpamp grarpamp@gmail.com wrote:
Philosophical...
Why does someone want to support and develop for Tor, or any other overlay p2p anonymity network, or crypto, for that matter? When even a fix to the manpage could be read and used by onion users and operators, same for metrics, lists, or any other part of the ecosystem. Does one fear "bad" things, association, or support "good" things?
I immediately observed that “Beastr0” posted via a Protonmail address. Whereas Protonmail supports .onion, and has its own .onion:
https://protonirockerxow.onion/
https://protonmail.com/blog/tor-encrypted-email/
https://protonmail.com/blog/protonmail-tor-censorship/
https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/tor-setup/
Why does an individual who does not support .onion use a service which promotes its own .onion?
Philosophical...
Tor supports the *right to read*.
Imagine that you were in the biggest library in the world—but a librarian (or security camera) watched over your shoulder to observe and record everything you read. You’d find that you self-censor your selections. You would avoid anything too controversial—even if it were something you wanted to read so that you could write an argument against it! You would only read things you guess were acceptable to those watching you. Adapt “Beastr0’s” statement, “I would prefer to not have my real name attached” (to this controversial book).
**That is the Web without Tor.** Tor shields readers from the shoulder-surfing librarian, the eye-tracking security cameras which observe each *word* you read, the third-party analytics trackers and “social media” buttons...
Tor also supports the *right to write*.
The ability to read without being tracked must be matched by the ability to publish anonymously, or pseudonymously. The right of anonymous publication is the cornerstone of the freedom of speech. .onion protects that right.
/* * .onion also has many additional uses; for but a few examples: * * 0. Taking load off exit nodes; e.g. if you run Debian, switch your * `apt` updates to download from the repositories listed at * https://onion.debian.org/ A/K/A http://5nca3wxl33tzlzj5.onion/ . * See also https://onion.torproject.org/ * A/K/A http://yz7lpwfhhzcdyc5y.onion/ . * * 1. Enabling Bitcoin nodes to accept incoming connections without * exposing their IP addresses. * * 2. Enabling communications tools such as Ricochet. * * 3. [...add your own here...] */
Pens... write code.
Code is speech. I observe that just as many fine .onion operators, “Beastr0” desires to exercise the right to publish free speech under a pseudonym:
On 2018-01-10 00:38:47 at +0000, Beastr0 beastr0@protonmail.com wrote:
For the time being I would prefer to not have my real name attached to Tor so I hope you don't mind if I introduce myself as Beastro.
I love Tor and its mission.
I hope that “Beastr0” will reconsider his/her/its pseudonymously expressed opposition to .onion.
/* * Cf. my current .sig motto, a matter of conceptual juxtaposition in * popular propaganda as observed by yours truly. I am innocent. * Aren’t “bad guys” the ones who should be tapped, tracked, and * searched? How does anybody dare suggest that I should submit to * surveillance *because* I am innocent, i.e. “have nothing to hide”? * * “‘If you’re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide.’ * * “No! Because I do nothing wrong, I have nothing to show.” * * — nullius@nym.zone */
#endif /* !_ON_TOPIC_FOR_DEV_LIST_ */
Some interesting points, guys, thank you for sending them. Perhaps I will change my opinion one day and if I do I'm sure some of your thoughts on the subject will contribute to that. Best,
- Bstro
p.s. I'm well aware that Proton Mail has .onion sites. I have nothing against them for having .onion websites. The same way I'm not against Qubes or even Tor for having .onion sites. As to why I use it... I'm not sure to be honest. I study and work in the security field so I guess like most of us I'm just paranoid.
Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [tor-dev] Agnostic Tools: Code Dev and Support For Local Time: January 11, 2018 8:00 PM UTC Time: January 11, 2018 8:00 PM From: nullius@nym.zone To: tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
On 2018-01-10 11:22:22 at +0000, Beastr0 beastr0@protonmail.com wrote:
I don't really care what I work on, except I do not support .onion websites (though I am willing to be convinced otherwise) so I would prefer not to participate directly in their development. [...] Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
On 2018-01-11 18:36:21 at +0000, grarpamp grarpamp@gmail.com wrote:
Philosophical... Why does someone want to support and develop for Tor, or any other overlay p2p anonymity network, or crypto, for that matter? When even a fix to the manpage could be read and used by onion users and operators, same for metrics, lists, or any other part of the ecosystem. Does one fear "bad" things, association, or support "good" things?
I immediately observed that “Beastr0” posted via a Protonmail address. Whereas Protonmail supports .onion, and has its own .onion:
https://protonirockerxow.onion/
https://protonmail.com/blog/tor-encrypted-email/
https://protonmail.com/blog/protonmail-tor-censorship/
https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/tor-setup/
Why does an individual who does not support .onion use a service which promotes its own .onion?
Philosophical...
Tor supports the right to read.
Imagine that you were in the biggest library in the world—but a librarian (or security camera) watched over your shoulder to observe and record everything you read. You’d find that you self-censor your selections. You would avoid anything too controversial—even if it were something you wanted to read so that you could write an argument against it! You would only read things you guess were acceptable to those watching you. Adapt “Beastr0’s” statement, “I would prefer to not have my real name attached” (to this controversial book).
That is the Web without Tor. Tor shields readers from the shoulder-surfing librarian, the eye-tracking security cameras which observe each word you read, the third-party analytics trackers and “social media” buttons...
Tor also supports the right to write.
The ability to read without being tracked must be matched by the ability to publish anonymously, or pseudonymously. The right of anonymous publication is the cornerstone of the freedom of speech. .onion protects that right.
/*
.onion also has many additional uses; for but a few examples:
Taking load off exit nodes; e.g. if you run Debian, switch your
apt updates to download from the repositories listed at
https://onion.debian.org/ A/K/A http://5nca3wxl33tzlzj5.onion/ .
See also https://onion.torproject.org/
A/K/A http://yz7lpwfhhzcdyc5y.onion/ .
Enabling Bitcoin nodes to accept incoming connections without
exposing their IP addresses.
Enabling communications tools such as Ricochet.
[...add your own here...]
*/
Pens... write code.
Code is speech. I observe that just as many fine .onion operators, “Beastr0” desires to exercise the right to publish free speech under a pseudonym:
On 2018-01-10 00:38:47 at +0000, Beastr0 beastr0@protonmail.com wrote:
For the time being I would prefer to not have my real name attached to Tor so I hope you don't mind if I introduce myself as Beastro. I love Tor and its mission.
I hope that “Beastr0” will reconsider his/her/its pseudonymously expressed opposition to .onion.
/*
Cf. my current .sig motto, a matter of conceptual juxtaposition in
popular propaganda as observed by yours truly. I am innocent.
Aren’t “bad guys” the ones who should be tapped, tracked, and
searched? How does anybody dare suggest that I should submit to
surveillance because I am innocent, i.e. “have nothing to hide”?
“‘If you’re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide.’
“No! Because I do nothing wrong, I have nothing to show.”
— nullius@nym.zone
/
#endif / !ON_TOPIC_FOR_DEV_LIST */
nullius@nym.zone | PGP ECC: 0xC2E91CD74A4C57A105F6C21B5A00591B2F307E0C Bitcoin: bc1qcash96s5jqppzsp8hy8swkggf7f6agex98an7h | (Segwit nested: 3NULL3ZCUXr7RDLxXeLPDMZDZYxuaYkCnG) (PGP RSA: 0x36EBB4AB699A10EE) “‘If you’re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide.’ No! Because I do nothing wrong, I have nothing to show.” — nullius
tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
Hi,
This thread is off-topic, and unwelcoming to new contributors. Please stop.
This list is used for developing new features, bug fixes, and removing old features.
Criticising how people choose to volunteer their time doesn't help us develop tor.
Writing multiple, long, critical emails to respond to one line in someone's first thread, does not help new people do tor development.
I want everyone to be free to express themselves: but this list has a purpose, and we need to stick to that purpose.
I said this in the original thread as well:
On 10 Jan 2018, at 23:17, teor teor2345@gmail.com wrote:
That's fine. People are free to work on what they like. Convincing people to support Tor features is not a topic for this list :-)
If you want to continue a general discussion about the benefits of developing agnostic tools, or onion services, please move it to tor-talk.
T
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 5:44 PM, teor teor2345@gmail.com wrote:
This thread is off-topic This list is used for developing new features, bug fixes, and removing old features.
Here are three easily found and directly quoted charters for this list, none of which are strictly constrained to only the feature and bug topics described above...
"discussion regarding Tor development" "Development related discussion list" "for discussion by the developers"
unwelcoming to new contributors. Criticising how people choose to volunteer their time
Hardly. At least one email was newthreaded and deattributed, using no monikers or personal pronouns, being void of any directives or aggressive / abusive speech, and surely naught but positing free and open questions.
doesn't help us develop tor.
Nay but benefit... It can help make developers stronger through providing perhaps a rarely present oppurtunity outside the code routine for self thought, reflection and review, to reaffirm or even adapt / modify ones own course and efforts.
This has been noted as "interesting" by, and received "thank you" from, at least one tor developer.
Should we not welcome and collaborate with all who might have and allow for such occaisional thought time... are they not the most welcome of any devs.
- A fourth, the list... "is very low traffic"
As any such reflection therein should perhaps be.
I want everyone to be free to express themselves
As all are.
we need to stick to that purpose.
For were there to be no such general prevailing focus on the tech at hand, there might be few, and lesser, agnostic tools.
To wit, one lesser...
#endif
nullius.c:1:2: error: #endif without #if
;)
On 2018-01-12 07:26:52 at +0000, grarpamp grarpamp@gmail.com wrote:
To wit, one lesser...
#endif
nullius.c:1:2: error: #endif without #if
;)
Touché. I suppose I’ll be babysitting the build for awhile. Fair enough?
(I began writing this earlier, but returned (-1) with ENOTIME.)
On 2018-01-11 at 22:44:56 +0000, teor teor2345@gmail.com wrote:
This thread is off-topic,
I know. But for understandable reasons, as stated below; and with all due apologies for a “-dev” list:
On 2018-01-11 20:00:45 at +0000, nullius nullius@nym.zone wrote:
#endif /* !_ON_TOPIC_FOR_DEV_LIST_ */
teor:
and unwelcoming to new contributors.
0. I disagree in principle with the “welcoming environment” notion; but that’s hereto irrelevant, for nothing an ordinary reasonable person would deem “unwelcoming” was said on this thread.
1. It’s an awful trick, soliciting contributions for a project which is ideological in nature—and then expecting people to avoid speaking out for their motivating ideological passions, when those are entwined with the context of a technical discussion. Some might even consider that unwelcoming to potential (quasi-)new contributors, such as myself.
2. I didn’t state any sort of personalized invective; and I certainly didn’t read grarpamp’s post that way, either. For my part, to the contrary, I stated constructive criticisms and counterarguments as to an abstract opinion. That was more than warranted, given Tor’s stated mission—and whereas “Beastr0” had expressed reasonable open-mindedness, as I fairly quoted (“(though I am willing to be convinced otherwise)”). I also thought that “Beastr0” replied to me quite reasonably:
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2018-January/012802.html
On 2018-01-11 at 22:41:26 +0000, Beastr0 beastr0@protonmail.com wrote:
Some interesting points, guys, thank you for sending them. Perhaps I will change my opinion one day and if I do I'm sure some of your thoughts on the subject will contribute to that. Best,
- Bstro
“Beastr0”, you’re welcome—and thanks for thinking it over! Given my aforestated “motivating ideological passions” about the right to anonymous publication, that little note made my day.
If anything I said in this thread could potentially help bring someone out there to reconsider and perhaps support .onion in the future, then I would call that a happy ending all-around.
Please stop.
-
Beastr0 -
grarpamp -
nullius -
teor