Slashdot Mirror


Tor Named One of the Year's Best Products

Iorek writes "PC World lauds Tor, an anonymous Internet communication system, as better than its paid competitors, and one of the best 100 products of 2005. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is supporting Tor development, has a press release as well."

40 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. Such hypocrisy. by King_of_Prussia · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How does slashdot get away with publicly lauding Tor as the great application that it is, while simultaneously blocking over 90% of the nodes from posting to slashdot? Try it now, it took me thirty tries to post a comment to slashdot using Tor the other day.

    --

    Making the moon less necessary since 1998.

    1. Re:Such hypocrisy. by stormcoder · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've complained repeatedly about this and I haven't gotten a response.

      --
      Sorry my bullshit sensor overloaded.
    2. Re:Such hypocrisy. by King_of_Prussia · · Score: 2, Interesting
      So you're saying that having no crapfloods or troll posts (which can be filtered out with the moderation system anyway) is more important than some oppressed chinese guy getting his opinion out on a part of the web banned in China?

      The editors have gone beyond a simple lack of faith in the moderation system, they are actively undermining it with broad account* and IP bans. For a website that makes such noise about being anti-censorship these are pretty funny actions.

      *fun fact: if you log out and request the password for an account named "sllort", you will never post to slashdot again with that IP. Ever. Is this the same slashdot that has an entire section called "Your Rights Online"?

      --

      Making the moon less necessary since 1998.

    3. Re:Such hypocrisy. by sinner0423 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because Tor works, apparently.

      It's the same with any other internet service - give it a few days, and watch the abuse roll on in. Web, Email, Chat, they can ALL be used for great things but the perpensity for abuse lurks just around the corner, and Tor isn't an exception to this.

      If they allowed 100% of the Tor connections, the comments would be flooded with more ascii goatse pics, GNAA Postings, tubgirl links, and all kinds of wonderful trollish crap. It already is bad to a certain degree, and that's with a publicly moderated rating system and IP filtering already in place.

      I'm all for internet anonymity and free speech, but there are very few reasons why someone would need to visit the slashdot comments section with a proxy.

    4. Re:Such hypocrisy. by noneloud · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let me ask you something: If we have too many crapfloods, and trolls, how will anyone's voice be audible over the white noise. Yes, anonymity is important expecially for people in China and other restrictive places you talked about. However, If people abuse a system too much (including the moderation system...which they do as well), then that system can't sustain itself.

    5. Re:Such hypocrisy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      How anonymous Tor is is well understood by the folks who do anonymity research. In short, it is most likely not anonymous against the US government.

      There is a recent paper by George Danezis and Steven Murdoch about attacks on Tor. (IEEE Security and Privacy)

    6. Re:Such hypocrisy. by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they allowed 100% of the Tor connections, the comments would be flooded with more ascii goatse pics, GNAA Postings, tubgirl links, and all kinds of wonderful trollish crap.

      That's what the moderation system is designed in part to deal with. (Of course, with the addition of friends and freaks, and score modifiers for them, it's turned into more of a way of ensuring that your world view is never disturbed by reading things you don't agree with, but I digress...)

      There's also nothing stopping the editors from deleting such crap. The ASCII pics and GNAA posts are easily seen at a glance, and it'd be trivial to produce a private interface that had a "delete this shite" button against each comment (or checkbox and single "Delete the shite" button, or whatever)

      I'm all for internet anonymity and free speech, but there are very few reasons why someone would need to visit the slashdot comments section with a proxy.

      Corporate whistle blowers, people in countries with oppresive regimes commenting on stories about some aspect of that regime (eg net censorship in China), people discussing first-hand experience of illegal activities, etc. No, it doesn't happen very often, but when it does it could potentially lead to very interesting comments.

      All of that is beside the point, however. It most certainly does seem rather odd that the Slashdot editors praise Tor while simultaneously seeking to prevent access to the site with it. It's effectively saying "Yes, annonymous internet access is necessary and good, but not to *my* site!"

      So, what, other sites should allow it, but not /.? "Do as I say, not as I do"? If you want to convince people that something is good, allowing it yourself is generally seen as a necessary first step.

    7. Re:Such hypocrisy. by Frodo+Crockett · · Score: 2, Interesting

      However, If people abuse a system too much (including the moderation system...which they do as well), then that system can't sustain itself.

      So why not just give out mod points more often to moderators with a good track record?

      --
      "The newly born animals are then whisked off for a quick run through a giant baking oven." --heard on Food Network
    8. Re:Such hypocrisy. by Mr2001 · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is a recent paper by George Danezis and Steven Murdoch about attacks on Tor. (IEEE Security and Privacy)

      I think you're referring to "Low-Cost Traffic Analysis of Tor" (PDF).

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    9. Re:Such hypocrisy. by drsquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For a website that makes such noise about being anti-censorship these are pretty funny actions.

      There's nothing wrong with censorship on a private site. Complaints about censorship apply to governments and other authorities stopping people exchanging certain information, i.e. passing laws banning obscene material. That's completely different from say a shop refusing to sell porn magazines. Slashdot has no obligation to post anyone's comments at all, but that doesn't mean that government censorship is acceptable.

      This discussion also begs the question of the value of dissidents using anonymous Slashdot postings to get their message out. Is anything really changed by some Chinaman bitching about being opressed? If he posts it anonymously, no-one will read it because no-one is reading Anonymous Coward comments because they're 99% crapfloods. The irony of this is, if you want dissidents to be able to provide information anonymously, there needs to be a system to filter out the crapfloods and trolls. Maybe if the lameness-filter and moderation systems were less broken and corrupt, no IPs would need to be banned. But that would require both better programming from the site administrators, and more maturity and intelligence from the moderators. Are either likely?

    10. Re:Such hypocrisy. by Aeiri · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not that difficult to change your IP address. All you have to do is change your virtual MAC address and reconnect to your ISP, their DHCP server recognizes you as a different computer.

      To change your virtual MAC address under Linux, given you are using the primary ethernet adapter (not sure in Windows):
      ifconfig eth0 hw ether NE:WM:AC:AD:RE:SS

      Tor has a limited amount of IPs, and if trolls are using it in order to post, they are doing it the wrong way.

  2. tor blacklists :-( by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These lists will become more and more common as people figure out what Tor is.. it's a nice idea but..

    Even freenode has banned known tor connections. But that's what happens when you give 12 and 13 year old uber el3et linux hax0rs more power than they deserve.

  3. Publicity a good thing or not? by Critical_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have been a Tor users for a very long time and, to a certain extent, the fact that it is not very well publicized has kept the system relatively free of the possibilty abuse. When I say possibility of abuse, I am talking about the media saying that Tor is a way to do anonymous torrents of copyrighted material, transferring child porn, etc. As Tor becomes more publicized, will I have to deal with articles from self-proclaimed experts accusing Tor of being a vehicle for such activity? Will I then see some politician try to pass legislation against anonymizer type software? Maybe I'm being alarmist, but these days anything is possible.

    1. Re:Publicity a good thing or not? by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Any plans in the TODO for steno-tor in the near future ? I don't really keep up with the dev list to know what's going on with the project anymore.

    2. Re:Publicity a good thing or not? by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is possible and highly probably, and you should be damned proud.
      If you only want freedom for people who agree with you, you're no better fundamentaly than the most oppresive of rulers. If you had the power to remove all kiddie porn from tor/freenet/$PRODUCT_X, would you? What if a christian fundamentalist had the same power to remove all talk of homosexuality? (a sins a sin..) Bush removing all info about the cipro(anthax antidote) a month prior to the whitehouse being anthraxed?

      You either have free speech or you don't, anything less than entire freedom(especially for those of controversial subjects) is as worthless as not having any at all.

      --
      Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
    3. Re:Publicity a good thing or not? by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What do you use it for?

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
  4. Tor Router App? by HeX314 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Anyone know if there is (or will be) a Linux Tor binary for NAT routers? I have a Linux router, and I'd like to use it as a client in the Tor network but a server for local computers (behind the router).

  5. Re:Hmm by kingofalaska · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Scroll down, read the articles about the so-called "Patriot Act", or censorship, or...

    There are many reasons. Yes, it can be abused, just as a stick or a rock can be abused.

    KOA

    Giant Missile Defense Radar Sails

  6. Re:Hmm by stevey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't get why so many people put letters in envelopes, what have they got to hide?

    Why not write on the back of postcards so everybody can make sure they're not hiding illegal words..

    It's a slippery slope. Encryption is useful.

  7. Re:Hmm by Dr+Damage+I · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The fact that one does not wish the state or ones ISP to know ones secrets does not imply that those secrets are illicit in nature. A person could be transmitting commercially sensitive material which if released could be used by ones competitors, or one could simply be averse to having people know that one uses ordinary, legal porn.

    It's a simple fact that People like privacy and place a non zero value on it. The phrase "what are you trying to hide" is the last refuge of the voyeur.

    --
    "Cursed is he who rises early in the morning..." Isiah 5:11
  8. Insightful? by poptones · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This isn't even an insightful question. "That much encryption?" What the hell does that mean? If the encryption is easily cracked it's not worth doing, you might as well just be doing your banking over something like ROT13 encoded connections, huh?

    I've been wondering why the hell the network has been getting slower and slower and slower over the last weeks. I guess now I know.

    Why is an anonymous network needed? Well for one thing it's not anonymous regarding the type of uses the critics like to trot out i.e kiddie porn and cracking, since a good many of the connection nodes originate in the US or Germany, two of the most monitored countries in the world. Your connection can go through a hundred drops after that it won't matter at all if you make that first hit straight to MIT or some .de domain and you're doing anything to interest the FBI.

    What it IS useful for (that is before it became so terribly overloaded every click ends up taking thirty seconds or more to respond) is surfing without worrying about your local "community standards" enforced ISP looking over your shoulder or the bazillions of admonkies being able to snoop. Tor is commonly packaged with privoxy, the two together make moving about the net a lot nicer (even slashdot).

  9. Onion routers are by no means new but Tor is by Gopal.V · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Tor uses something called Onion Routing. But interestingly the original system was heavily patented and Tor had to work around all of those with something called "Telescopic Circuits". The problem (as far as my feeble brain understands) is that this is suitable for connection oriented data, but not for routing each packet a different way - seriously I'd love to run Tor as tun0 so that my IP packets head a different way and do point-to-point, but that seems to be a distant dream. Right now it seems to be just protocol proxying.

    And the problem with onion routing is that it is neither high-bandwidth or low-latency - just anonymous. Sharing files over Tor is a blatant misuse - but tracker comm over it is perfectly valid (Azureus already has a plugin - though I like dht better).

    Interestingly, I2P calls them Garlic routers (the pun is not lost on some of us).
    1. Re:Onion routers are by no means new but Tor is by h4rm0ny · · Score: 2, Funny


      Seems a little ironic that a project that provides anonymity should be hindred by patent infringements.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
  10. Huh? by poptones · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't understand why you would need tor to hit here. Just put slashdot on the "exception list" in your proxy config and it works great. The ads still get killed (if you are using privoxy) but the content is fast and complete.

    You might also trying setting up your tor config file. You do not HAVE to use the "trusted gateways" for the final drop, that is only how it is configured OOTB. Add "exit" to the untrusted gateway nodes permissions - heck you can even remove "exit" from the "trusted nodes" permissions. Now you're not connecting via those "known tor nodes."

    BTW it ain't just slashdot. Lots of sites still use IP information instead of session variables and it will drive you nuts trying to post to one of them or even stay connected without having to log in again every two minutes. Simple solution is to just add those sites to the "don't proxy these sites" list. May not be the solution you want if it's a "controversial" site that could lead to leagal attention, but if you're really worried about that sort of thing you're a fool for using tor for it anyway.

  11. Re:Hmm by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The thing I don't get with Tor is why someone would need that much encryption, unless they were transferring something illegal like copyrighted material.
    In some places, discussing things like "democracy" and "freedom" is illegal. In some places, it's verboten for women to bare their necks or ankles (much less anything else) in public. In some places, it's illegal to read books that involve sexual behavior, or criticize the government, or any number of other things.

    Are you still convinced that a network of potential "illegal" uses is such a bad thing?
    --
    "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
  12. Re:Hmm by advocate_one · · Score: 3, Informative
    did you even for one instant read the f.ing article???

    Tor: Packages and source

    Tor is distributed as Free Software under the 3-clause BSD license.

    Do you even think for one nanosecond that the EFF would be supporting it if it were closed???

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  13. Commercialized Already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    It seems one of the first companies to jump on the Tor bandwagon is VPM. They are selling a Linux desktop on a 128MB USB stick with everything preconfigured to connect using Tor. Sounds like a neat idea even though you could make it all yourself without paying $45.

  14. Tor like to thank the Academy by jalefkowit · · Score: 5, Funny

    Tor very happy to win award. Make Tor happy. Tor not smash now.

  15. Re:Hmm by mrsev · · Score: 2

    >>In some places, it's verboten for women to bare their necks or ankles (much less anything else) in public....

    Well where I live it is illegal for my wife to bare her naked breasts in public. I demand her freedom!

    But seriously they have their laws and we have ours, you cant really compare human rights with laws regarding decency. Dont get me worng I am all for emancipation but please choose your battles better.

    On a interesting side note , in the UK I believe we do not have a freedom of speech. CAn someone confirm this?

  16. Re:Hmm by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 3, Interesting
    These laws are passed for a reason; becuase they reflect community standards.
    First, this is a blatant troll. For example, the Taliban forbade women from getting an education. Now that the Taliban have for the most part been defeated in Afghanistan, Afghani women are pursuing all sorts of educations, jobs, and are even walking around without burqas on their heads. If it was all about community standards, these women would never dare such things, lest the rest of the community notice and take action against them.

    "Community standards" had nothing to do with it; the standards were set by a fairly small group of lunatics who happened to have a lot of guns. The same can be said of places like North Korea, Iraq, Sudan, and (dare I say it) perhaps even the United States. The FCC, backed by the federal government, which happens to have a lot more firepower than you or I, decides what is or isn't OK on television. As in several other above-listed states, the relatively small group with the superior firepower are the ones who set the rules, communities be damned.

    Community standards are hogwash, anyway. I live in the deep south, the Bible belt. I know people who are staunch conservatives, or republicans, or Bush-Frist voters, or whatever you want to call them. These are the guys who go to that annual rally (I forget what it's called) where they profess their faith to God and their wives, and denounce pornography and infidelity. Yet I run into these guys at the strip clubs, at the liquor stores, you name it. All of the "sins" they're supposedly dead-set against, they more often than not participate in themselves.

    Your average Bible-belter will vote against gambling, but then you'll find him in the casinos in Tunica or Biloxi. He'll vote against a state lottery, but darned if you don't run into him buying Powerball tickets at the gas station. He'll write to the FCC complaining about Janet Jackson, but as you drive past the adult bookstore, you see his car parked outside. He set the so-called "community standards" when he voted, but he doesn't even follow them himself. That's your average "community standards" progenitor.

    Look no further than the Parents' Television Council for evidence of this. The PTC - which as you may recall from prior articles here is responsible for some 98% of all complaints to the FCC - proudly hosts on their own website the offensive clips from television shows they complain about. Even (gasp) children can surf by and find the stuff that's so offensive, they don't want their children to see it. How's that for irony?

    For several months they hosted a video clip at http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/clips/WithoutaTrace_o rgy.wmv which was ranked #2 and #3 in Google on a search for "teen orgy party." (They removed it after I wrote to them about their hypocrisy, but you can still find references to its existence.) The trend is ongoing; for example, they're currently hosting the video of the Paris Hilton Carl's Jr. commercial which they describe as "extremely graphic and sexually explicit."

    Earth to Parents Television Council, your website is fully accessible to any child who has internet access, why are you hosting "extremely graphic and sexually explicit" content there? Fucking hypocrites.

    Who are you to advocate breaking them?
    A human being who has tasted freedom, who knows about life without oppression, who understands the value of the right to read and speak freely, and who hates seeing women all covered up.
    --
    "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
  17. Re:There is no privacy online by qubex · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm British but I live and work in China. Many websites are unreachable because of the censorship here (e.g.: news.bbc.co.uk).

    Tor lets me surf those websites and find out what is going on in the world, and find out the things the PRC government doesn't want its citizens knowing about.

    In short, it is my window on the world.

    --
    "Place me in the company of those who seek Truth, but deliver me from those who believe to have found it."
  18. Re:How about... by caluml · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Slashdot either eliminate "Anonymous Coward" posting

    No - it should leave the ability to post anonymously, but only if you are logged in to an actual account.

  19. Same here. by Jerk+City+Troll · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I was banned within hours of settiing up Tor on my host.

  20. And Firefox is THE product of the year by hey · · Score: 3, Interesting
  21. Tor is ok, but by blue_adept · · Score: 3, Interesting

    if you want to surf anonymously without downloading and installing stuff, check out anonycat.

    http://anonycat.com/

    it's open source, so you can download and run it from your own computer if you want, but you can also just surfy anonymously from the main page.

    it's pretty good for viewing slashdot, too, which you can't do with Tor.

    --

    "Is this just useless, or is it expensive as well?"
    1. Re:Tor is ok, but by ldd23 · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's not exactly anonymous. The anonycat server knows your IP address and what page you're browsing. The whole point of the TOR, I2P, etc. anonymizing network systems is that no other entity on the network can determine both your IP address and what content on the network you're using.

  22. Good article - tor server count will soar by Werrismys · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Every time tor is mentioned on Slashdot, the networks gains speed thanks to a surge in runnin server numbers.

    --
    'Once scientists, even the dim-witted social scientists, get muzzled, the Western Civilization is finished.' - oldhack
  23. Slashcode is not designed for anonyminity by typical · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because Tor works, apparently.

    It's the same with any other internet service - give it a few days, and watch the abuse roll on in. Web, Email, Chat, they can ALL be used for great things but the perpensity for abuse lurks just around the corner, and Tor isn't an exception to this.


    No, it's because Slashcode lacks support for anonymous use. Until someone adds said support, Slashdot will not be anonymously usable.

    If everyone created an account, no problem.

    The thing is that Slashdot's codebase uses blacklisting as part of its functionality (it's how they keep abusers from flooding the board). Blacklisting does not work in a pure anonymous environment (that allows abuse if many entities collaborate to abuse the system, which is the case for most systems) without "expensive IDs" (the use of some resource which one cannot produce en-masse to identify onesself). Slashcode treats IP addresses as "expensive IDs", intending that those wanting to abuse the board have a limited set of IP addresses available to them, and those become blacklisted. Tor extends the availability of Tor-enabled IPs (expensive IDs) to anyone who wants. Slashcode cannot understand this. To make Slashcode work in an anonymous environment, support for expensive IDs that work in an anonymous environment must be added. There are many mechanisms for doing expensive IDs.

    Slashcode currently uses both IPs (they can get banned) and accounts (they can get banned as well, and it takes a while to work up a high-post, low UIN account) as expensive IDs. IPs cannot be used in an anonymous environment. Accounts could, but probably must be boostrapped in a non-anonymous environment. That is, it would be possible for Slashdot to allow only registered users to use Slashdot from Tor systems (I could even register my IP as one that only allows registered use), but to prevent someone from mass-creating accounts, these accounts would have to be bootstrapped from a non-anonymous environment -- for example, perhaps an IP could only create an account a week, but once created, users could use their accounts on Tor systems.

    Another popular expensive ID that saw some interest during the antispam discussion days is solved problems that require many CPU cycles. Generate a hard mathematical problem, to an anonymous user and the person has to burn 5 CPU-minutes of cycles solving a problem in order to post. They'll have a hard time flooding the board.

    Another popular expensive ID is human time -- hence the OCRable letters that low-karma accounts and ACs have been seeing recently.

    Another expensive ID is transitive trust -- allow accounts that have "trusted" accounts marking those accounts as, in turn, "trusted" (something like the friends system, but should not use the friend marking, which means something different) to use the board anonymously. If those accounts abuse the board, the abusing account loses his trust and the account that endorsed him loses some trust, transitively back to the source. This isn't *fully* anonymous (since the truster has to have some relationship with the trustee, even if it's nothing more than reading a Slashdot post made in non-anonymous mode).

    Any other mechanism that uses expensive IDs that can function in an anonymous environment will also work.

    I'm going to see whether or not open source solves this one. The Slashcode codebase is there, free, and open, and any number of people with crypto and security design experience read this board and presumably want to use Tor.

    I don't really care much about using Slashdot anonymously, so I'm not going to do it. I'll probably take advantage of it if someone else adds support to Slashcode for working in an anonymous environment, though.

    --
    Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
  24. Re:Hmm by po8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Uh, a US letter currently doesn't have to have a return address, much less a validated one. And a public mailbox in a big US city is pretty darn anonymizing. After all, they still haven't caught the folks who sent anthrax-filled letters to US government officials---and I'm guessing it's not for want of trying.

  25. Re:Hmm by Graabein · · Score: 2, Funny
    > did you even for one instant read the f.ing article???

    Tsk, tsk. You must be new here.

    ;-)

    --
    And remember kids: Never trust a computer you can actually lift.