Tor bug?: AllowInvalidNodes

[Freemor]

On Wed, 2006-16-08 at 18:00 -0400, Nick Mathewson wrote:

> But seriously, we're trying to do our best here.
> 

And IMHO, a damn fine job of it too.

  I think this thread points to some growing pains that Tor may face as
it gets larger. Namely, people not understanding the technology, or
worse (especially for security technologies) miss-understanding it.

  I work with people and computers all the time.. and often see people
thinking their firewall will stop viruses, that e-mail is secure, etc. 

  I think it might be good to write a "what Tor can and can't do" part
of the FAQ. I'd even be willing to take a stab at writing it (time
permitting... don't be expecting it tomorrow or anything like that).

  Sometimes it is useful to state quite clearly things like, Tor can't
protect you from social engineering attacks. Tor won't make e-mail
secure end-to-end, Tor wont defrag your HD. etc (o.k. that last one is a
bit flip.. but you get the point)

  Once again I'd like to express my thanks to all those that have taken
the time to Develop Tor, Tor documentation, etc. I think it is good (for
what it is) and getting better.

Take Care
Freemor



------

Freemor <freemor at yahoo.ca>
Freemor <freemor at rogers.com>

This e-mail has been digitally signed with GnuPG


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/attachments/20060816/2928d15f/attachment.pgp>