From Corbett Report:
“The TOR Project promises its users a modicum of privacy protection from would-be information gatherers, both small time crooks and nation-state cyber-security agencies. But do these promises hold up to scrutiny? And who is behind the TOR Project itself? And why did a TOR developer recently doxx a critic on Twitter? Joining us today to dissect this onion stew is Pearse Redmond of Porkins Policy Review.”
Download Corbett Report Interview 989
Show Notes From The Corbett Report:
Tor, CSpace And ZRTP Are Your Passport To Anonymity
Porkins Policy Radio episode 26 Peeling the onion behind Tor, EFF, and John Perry Barlow
Almost everyone involved in developing Tor was (or is) funded by the US government
EFF Becomes Omidyar Network Partner
Snowden’s First Move Against the NSA Was a Party in Hawaii
High-Traffic Colluding Tor Routers in Washington, D.C., and the Ugly Truth About Online Anonymity
Embassy leaks highlight pitfalls of Tor
How the NSA got to anonymized Tor users
‘Spoiled Onions’ in the Tor Network, Researchers Find
Has Tor been bugged by the NSA?
TOR: “Solidarity against online harassment”
Shit I Never Tweeted: A Heretic’s Lament
Comments
Reblogged this on ClearNFO and commented:
Some Great NFO on T0r …
As usual, a great job on this topic. Thanks!
While there are numerous questions about TOR there is a clear suggestion that the designers knew the obvious weakness, considering the number of people involved, and left this weakness as a hole only they could exploit. This is detailed in my article “Are TOR holes intentional?” (http://distinctivist.com/Article-2015-01-13).
Hey Pearse. I don’t agree with your conclusion that Tor is best avoided, though you sure highlight some shady characters hanging around. But I’m glad you (and James Corbett) have finally jumped on the HTTPS train.
Thanks for the comment and for listening. My apprehension towards using Tor has more to do with people who are not tech savvy. I would include myself in this category as well. If you really know what you are doing you could be fairly anonymous on Tor. My issue is that many of the Tor proponents are pushing it on people that don’t fully understand how to use it. Those people are perhaps even more unsafe on Tor.
I explored this a little bit more in my full podcast on Tor https://porkinspolicyreview.wordpress.com/2014/08/01/porkins-policy-radio-episode-26-peeling-the-onion-behind-tor-eff-and-john-perry-barlow/
There is also a lot more on the connections between all these groups and how they tie in with the Snowden story.
That’s a good point — but I’m not sure the Tor project is the source of this blanket anonymity advocacy. Indeed, some of the reporting you’ve cited is exactly what the Tor people warn you about: that if you reveal your identity in an unencrypted connection, Tor is not going to help. In fact, nothing can help you announcing in the clear who you are.
I’ve listened to your piece on Tor and JPB, and I’m definitely more skeptical of the EFF than I used to be. My understanding of the situation is a bit different, and filters more through an interagency power struggle, and the CIA picking up the NSA’s COMSEC department, which had been all but abandoned in the wake of collect-’em’-all post-9/11. The spies benefit from anonymity more than us in the short term, but I think we have the advantage in the long game. I also suspect there are TPTB alignments around panopticon vs secrecy-based control New World Ordery systems… possibly with new vs. old money alignments… But I digress…
Incidentally, Tor + ZRTP is a really good idea. Those two things put together guarantee connection perfect authenticity, good anonymity, and perfect privacy. All of which aren’t worth a damn if your computer is already hacked, of course.
Trackbacks
[…] For show notes and mp3 download please visit: https://porkinspolicyreview.wordpress.com/2015/01/13/corbett-report-interview-989-pearse-redmond-pee… […]