Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Why the Tor attack matters
41–50 of 77 posts
Re: Why the Tor attack matters
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dude the fact that nobody you know is worried should be the first clue that something is really wrong or you are hanging out with wrong people. Security, Privacy & Data Mining research are ripe for bureaucratic takedown. Incidences like these will only lead to harsher requirements and stifle future research. Its essential for the security community to police itself. As far as Patrick knowing what he's talking about I…
I'm not sure what the last part of your first paragraph was supposed to mean, but if I wanted to compare my own computer security cite record with yours, would I search scholar.google.com for "AMEDICALRe"? You've misread Patrick's messages to spectacular effect, leaving me with the impression that you were simply champing at the bit to jump at him and his silly bingo card site. Tor chose world governments as their ad…
While his passion for the issue has made his message more aggressive than you'd like, don't dismiss his claim because you believe he's just full of piss and vinegar. Looking past the totally unrelated arguments about his identity, I don't have any difficulty believing what he's said. I know several folks in American academia who have stated unequivocally that the amount of computing power and data analysis ability available to them would make Dr. Evil blush.
Let's be honest and set emotional responses and character assault aside here. If you take the emotion out of what he said, can you honestly say the rest of it is bullshit? It rings true to me, and he's right: if academia, which is generally held by the public to be above the sort of cloak and dagger stuff that happened with Tor, lost its way and tossed their ethics out the window ... Well, that's a Bad Thing in ways we can only begin to understand. Who's left for us to trust?
Re: Why the Tor attack matters
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure what the last part of your first paragraph was supposed to mean, but if I wanted to compare my own computer security cite record with yours, would I search scholar.google.com for "AMEDICALRe"? You've misread Patrick's messages to spectacular effect, leaving me with the impression that you were simply champing at the bit to jump at him and his silly bingo card site. Tor chose world governments as their ad…
To his credit, I'd guess he's not sharing his bona fides because doing so would jeopardize the program he alleges to be involved in, and there isn't a particular reason to doubt the veracity of his claim by virtue of his creating an anonymous account to protect said program. While his passion for the issue has made his message more aggressive than you'd like, don't dismiss his claim because you believe he's just full…
I don't even think I disagree with the second part of 'AMEDICALRe's root comment. But of course, that comment has very little to do with what Patrick actually said. Patrick is responding to the fact that an anti-surveillance tool that chose as its adversaries all the world's governments was broken for a sum of money any angel investor in SFBA could have coughed up.
Re: Why the Tor attack matters
#44The response by Patio11 regarding how this was acceptable penetration testing was beyond stupid. Just because you are univesity researcher does not means you can take money and then attack some random company and say LOL JK just doing "Research". Universities have enormous computing power / resources available via various means to do research. Just because I have access to a thousand node cluster does not means I can…
Actually, from a security perspective, its quite understandable. If you provide a tool that claims to be safe from state actors, they can use that kind of power to attack it.
That said, if it didn't pass the usual protocols at the university for ethical standards they can and should be fired regardless of the client or reason.
Re: Why the Tor attack matters
#45The response by Patio11 regarding how this was acceptable penetration testing was beyond stupid. Just because you are univesity researcher does not means you can take money and then attack some random company and say LOL JK just doing "Research". Universities have enormous computing power / resources available via various means to do research. Just because I have access to a thousand node cluster does not means I can…
Actually, from a security perspective, its quite understandable. If you provide a tool that claims to be safe from state actors, they can use that kind of power to attack it.
That said, if it didn't pass the usual protocols at the university for ethical standards they can and should be fired regardless of the client or reason.
Re: Why the Tor attack matters
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dude the fact that nobody you know is worried should be the first clue that something is really wrong or you are hanging out with wrong people. Security, Privacy & Data Mining research are ripe for bureaucratic takedown. Incidences like these will only lead to harsher requirements and stifle future research. Its essential for the security community to police itself. As far as Patrick knowing what he's talking about I…
I'm not sure what the last part of your first paragraph was supposed to mean, but if I wanted to compare my own computer security cite record with yours, would I search scholar.google.com for "AMEDICALRe"? You've misread Patrick's messages to spectacular effect, leaving me with the impression that you were simply champing at the bit to jump at him and his silly bingo card site. Tor chose world governments as their ad…
Right on all points regarding Tor's failures, except this above is the crux of the problem. Specifically, that the researchers did NOT disclose this to either the Tor project or the broader security community. They disclosed it to the Feds, pulled their presentation, and sat on it presumably forever until third parties smelled something fishy.
Patrick and you are correct in your criticism of the criticism, but the fact that academic security researchers have become obsequious functionaries to state power is a MUCH larger issue here, so much so that you are arguing at completely orthogonal purposes to many of us.
My guess is that this orthogonality is lost on AMEDICALRe, and theirs on you.
Re: Why the Tor attack matters
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure what the last part of your first paragraph was supposed to mean, but if I wanted to compare my own computer security cite record with yours, would I search scholar.google.com for "AMEDICALRe"? You've misread Patrick's messages to spectacular effect, leaving me with the impression that you were simply champing at the bit to jump at him and his silly bingo card site. Tor chose world governments as their ad…
the revelation that there is or was a flaw of that scale is a service to the Internet Right on all points regarding Tor's failures, except this above is the crux of the problem. Specifically, that the researchers did NOT disclose this to either the Tor project or the broader security community. They disclosed it to the Feds, pulled their presentation, and sat on it presumably forever until third parties smelled somet…
No, the big story here is that Tor was broken for a pittance. But that story is a lot less fun than demanding scalps from CMU, because it suggests that you might not in fact be able to thwart national SIGINT agencies with volunteer open source projects, and we nerds demand a monopoly on technological skill.
Re: Why the Tor attack matters
#48The response by Patio11 regarding how this was acceptable penetration testing was beyond stupid. Just because you are univesity researcher does not means you can take money and then attack some random company and say LOL JK just doing "Research". Universities have enormous computing power / resources available via various means to do research. Just because I have access to a thousand node cluster does not means I can…
If you had cut the ridiculous and mean first sentence out of this comment it would have been fine, but then, as you know, nobody would have cared about it, because you'd have been saying nothing everyone else hadn't already been saying.
Re: Why the Tor attack matters
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
To his credit, I'd guess he's not sharing his bona fides because doing so would jeopardize the program he alleges to be involved in, and there isn't a particular reason to doubt the veracity of his claim by virtue of his creating an anonymous account to protect said program. While his passion for the issue has made his message more aggressive than you'd like, don't dismiss his claim because you believe he's just full…
It is totally fine if they disagree with me. What's not fine is the way they chose to express their disagreement: by taking umbrage at the idea that anyone, let along the author of a Bingo Card site, would have an opinion contrary to theirs. I don't even think I disagree with the second part of 'AMEDICALRe's root comment. But of course, that comment has very little to do with what Patrick actually said. Patrick is re…
Re: Why the Tor attack matters
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is totally fine if they disagree with me. What's not fine is the way they chose to express their disagreement: by taking umbrage at the idea that anyone, let along the author of a Bingo Card site, would have an opinion contrary to theirs. I don't even think I disagree with the second part of 'AMEDICALRe's root comment. But of course, that comment has very little to do with what Patrick actually said. Patrick is re…
Fair enough. But I would argue that qualifying Tor as a group targeting world governments is a bit dramatic. That may be propagandist commentary on their part - they're entitled to make it, and people still use Tor in spite of it - but isn't the primary intention of Tor to preserve free speech and anonymity, and to offer protection from persecution (or prosecution) by nation-states that seek to quell dissent? And if…