eugen at leitl.org
Thu Jun 25 09:16:21 UTC 2009
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:50:08AM +0200, Timo Schoeler wrote:
> I never said that it's a bug. I just said that if we drop the connection
> to the 'normal' internet we lost the fight. Things like the french
It is more useful as seeing it as two unrelated networks. That
one is implemented as a virtual layer on top of another isn't
The point is that you can use two (or more, such as
you can use IPv4 and IPv6 on dual-stack setups, and VPNs)
> >The free, uncesored Intenet is dead.
> So, we already lost it.
If you want to see it in such stark terms, yes. However, it's still
perfectly possible to access and publish information uncensored.
Our task should be to remove the friction, to make it easier for
So far, operating anonymizing networks like Tor isn't illegal in
most locations, yet. Where it is illegal (frequently, by use of
unconstituional laws, which makes it high treason, and explicitly
allowing armed resistance if everything else fails in some constitutions,
like e.g. the German Grundgesetz), it is of course morally permissible
to use guerilla tactics.
A simple solution for that case would be to use a self-propagating Tor
worm, which infects systems, causes a fraction of them to become middleman and
others exits. Such a system would be self-propagating, and trying
to shut the nodes down would resemble a game of whack-a-mole.
> The problem is that TOR (and any other system accomplishing this target)
> excludes the 'masses', if one may say so.
In totalitarian countries, where means of publishing (such as xerox
machines) were outlawed a small fraction was still capable obtaining
Resistance in face of state threats isn't for the weak of heart.
If anonymous access is made illegal I don't expect more than 1-5%
of the population of using it.
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
More information about the tor-talk