[michael.holstein at csuohio.edu: Re: Anonymity questions]

[ADB]

Hmm. So is the media wrong too or are they actually in support of 
passive, all-encompassing taps, just not on targeted individuals?! That 
seems very backward don't you think?

~Andrew

Chris Palmer wrote:
> ADB writes:
>
>   
>> No crap. That's only if they're specifically watching YOU or something
>> you're connected to in some way. However, a large, vibrant Tor network
>> would greatly hinder 'roving wiretap' type passive intel gathering
>> operations.
>>     
>
> Roving wiretaps are *active* intelligence gathering operations. :) A
> roving wiretap is a wiretap in which the tappers have been authorized by
> a court to tap any phone the subject uses, not just a single phone (as
> in normal wiretap orders).
>
> Anyway, I'm not sure what effect Tor would have on something like the
> NSA's warrantless wiretapping program. They keep pretty detailed logs
> (and/or they can make use of the telco's pretty detailed logs, as EFF
> has alleged in its suit against ATT; I can provide some references to
> what typical logs contain if anyone cares), so they may still be able to
> do post facto, passive traffic analysis on streams carried by Tor.
>
> As the FAQ and Roger are careful to say, Tor does not defend against
> such powerful adversaries.
>
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/attachments/20060222/02a955c2/attachment.htm>