Slashdot Mirror


Tor - The Yin or the Yang?

An anonymous reader writes "Whitedust is running a interesting article on Tor, The Onion Router project sponsored by the EFF. Tor aims to offer anonymous internet use. Once sponsored by the Naval Research Lab with support from DARPA, it is now managed by The Free Haven Project. Although Tor claims to improve safety and security, the article goes into detail on how Tor can be used as a anonymous attack platform."

139 comments

  1. Google fight: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    yin yang wins over ying yang

  2. Just have to say it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    it's yin, not ying, you insen.... blah. :)

    1. Re:Just have to say it... by uberdave · · Score: 1

      So, what you're saying is that it is the yang?

  3. Cultural Idiots by jvagner · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's "yin or yang". Good going, Slashdot.

    1. Re:Cultural Idiots by atteSmythe · · Score: 3, Informative

      Messup is [sic] from TFA.

    2. Re:Cultural Idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Ying referes to an aspect of the male anatomy... So is this slip up a foreshadowing that Tor will eventually get the shaft?

    3. Re:Cultural Idiots by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, isn't it a mistake to try to seperate the two?

      It's the "Yin and Yang", or the 'Yin-Yang' as I understand it-- two opposite pieces of the same energy, both integral and complementary to each other. They cannot be removed from the whole, or the whole is destroyed.

      Using the word 'or' actually distorts the original meaning-- 'or' imply two different pieces, the Yin OR Yang-- with we're really talking about one thing.

      Yes, this sounds pedantic, but I think it's actually an important difference.

    4. Re:Cultural Idiots by loopback_127001 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It would be a very important difference, if you were right.

      Yin and Yang are opposites. They are two separate concepts that, together, balance one another out. If one or the other is too out of balance, you see problems, according to the theory.

      But the fact that yin or yang energy can be out of balance would indicate they are, in fact, two different things. Look at Chinese medicine, some substances are considered to have a strong 'yin' value, others to be primarily 'yang'.

      In short, you're getting it right that the two opposing forces are both necessary to create a 'whole', but you're getting it wrong to say that something can't be yin or yang. Although I suppose if your point is really that there is no such thing as a pure-yin or pure-yang object in the universe, that is technically true. but damn, that's even more pedantic than I thought you were being. =)

      Of course, this is all needless wanking around an article that thinks 'yin or yang?' is a clever way of saying 'good or bad?' And, as has already been pointed out, can't spell 'yin' right in the first fucking place.

    5. Re:Cultural Idiots by jvagner · · Score: 1

      Doesn't mean they can't correct it.. right?

    6. Re:Cultural Idiots by atteSmythe · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Prolly should've used the [sic] tag or changed the title. Blame for everybody!

    7. Re:Cultural Idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they ran it through Google for spell-checking, or used the Google spell checking API. That would explain why they got it wrong, since Google did, too.

    8. Re:Cultural Idiots by PakProtector · · Score: 1

      It should be 'Yin and Yang' never 'Yin or Yang,' and upon looking at an actual picture you may see why.

      You cannot have good without evil, or hot without cold, because if something is relative, you always have to have something to measure it against.

      Also, a much better arguement, in this particular case, is that the Yin contains the seed of the Yang, and the Yang the seed of the Yin. One never exists without atleast a little bit of the other.

      --

      Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
      man: no entry for woman in the manual.
      "Qua!?"

    9. Re:Cultural Idiots by tclout · · Score: 1

      The parent post is entirely correct. It is Yin and Yang. Yin contains the seed of Yang. Yang contains the seed of Yin. The Tao is inseparable. To do so is a misrepresentation and would therefore not be the true Tao.

      Look at the picture homeboys.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taoism

    10. Re:Cultural Idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it a more important difference than that between "yin" and "ying"? Definitely not.

    11. Re:Cultural Idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your comment image got /.ed amazing but then again, not so much

    12. Re:Cultural Idiots by PakProtector · · Score: 1

      Thank you. I feel that I would have made my instructors finally feel that their tutelage was not entirely wasted.

      --

      Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
      man: no entry for woman in the manual.
      "Qua!?"

  4. anon attack platform? yup! by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's already being used this way. Friends still in IRC have been fighting Tor attacks by crapflooders that require 15-20 bans to get rid of the jerk. and the IP's line up with Tor proxies.

    It's not hard to modify the client to do nasties for you. hell it can be used to attack any web forum easily without modification.

    unfortunately the kiddies discovered it useful for attacking already.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:anon attack platform? yup! by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This just tells us what we already knew--online forums and chat mechanisms and other similar technologies should always be designed to require registration.

      IRC is a relic from the ancient design museum, a reminder that once, when the internet was young, everyone who could run a server on the 'net could be trusted. SMTP is the same way, along with a number of other fossilized protocols. These protocols, if they are to continue to be useful in the new age of IP spoofing, dynamic IPs, and wormhole routing, need to be redesigned with a modicum of security built into them.

      Most people aren't willing to create an account with their real email address to post crapfloods. The few who do can be easily banned by email address.

      I know, I know, I'm posting on the world's biggest counterexample for my opinion. Such is life.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:anon attack platform? yup! by Ex+Machina · · Score: 1

      Of course since the directory of Tor nodes (not client nodes, but endpoints) is public, it would not be hard to make a script that klines (or +b or eggdrop bans) all the Tor exit points.

    3. Re:anon attack platform? yup! by phntm · · Score: 0

      nix irc already blocks all tor proxies using the tor.dnsbl.sectoor.de dnsbl wich i recommend you all to do.

    4. Re:anon attack platform? yup! by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2, Informative

      A note that some IRC networks (well, Freenode) automatically detect Tor connections and assign them a hostmask of the form whateverwhatever.tor, and it's easy enough to ban or ignore *.tor from there.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    5. Re:anon attack platform? yup! by sillybilly · · Score: 1

      Literary authors in the past authored quite a few creations under artistic names. It's especially nice to use names like sillybilly on slashdot, where you can let it go and voice your opinions and abuse your right to freedom of expression to the limit, without having to fear someone disliking a single sentence of yours and hunting you down for it. I mean it's not impossible, nothing's impossible, but it adds an extra fence, extra layer of safety. I don't think I'd like to know everyone's real names here, because I'd get to read much less honesty and there'd be a lot less spicy posts. I like the truth shoved in my face, from both extremes. If there is truly a real problem, the authorities can still jump the hoops, issue the warrants and track somebody down based on ip-address/isp/time of logon/phone#/witnesses.

    6. Re:anon attack platform? yup! by PerlDudeXL · · Score: 1

      on our irc channel we had a problem with a single jerk who always used a different nickname. so the channel was set to require a nickserv registered nick. didn't stop him. he registered his 20+ nicks and continued to annoy us.

    7. Re:anon attack platform? yup! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Disclaimer: this isn't directed at the parent, but rather the "friends" of the parent.]

      Well... if it ain't the ole' pot calling the ole' kettle black. IRCers complaining about crapflooding?

      WTF. Seriously. That's all IRC has ever *been* about: building the best botnet to get ops on as many channels as possible. If anybody ever tells you different, they're lying or really have no clue what IRC is used for (in which case, tell them to go find a mud or a talker instead).

    8. Re:anon attack platform? yup! by Amoeba · · Score: 1
      unfortunately the kiddies discovered it useful for attacking already.

      Actually, it's also being used by security professionals and pen-testers for legitimate testing and assessment. There's currently a discussion regarding TOR for pen-testing purposes on the SecurityFocus pen-test mailing list. See http://securityfocus.com/archive/101/406238/30/0/t hreaded.

      Just because the kiddies are using it doesn't minimize the usefulness of the protocol. Bitorrent, P2P, and other protocols face the same abuse issues.

      Full disclosure: I am the moderator of the pen-test mailing list.

      --
      Do not taunt Happy-Fun Ball
  5. I say negative outweighs the positive. by dewc · · Score: 2, Informative

    While I do see some valid uses for it, I've only seen it abused on IRC by people who are using them to flood. I know, IRC isn't the center of the online universe.

    1. Re:I say negative outweighs the positive. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see plety of uses for it: Boss can't discover that some surf pr0n at work; admin doesn't know about info passing; that woman who WILL be my wife doesn't know where the emails and such come from; etc.

      Actually, I do use it to give me an outside address for testing our system. The normal internal address may produce invalid results (depending on what I'm looking for). And I do use it for sucuring my identity when I'm at home surfing for the fun of it. It slows me down, but I like it. Ya gotta take the good with the bad.

  6. Proxies too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Proxies can be used for good or bad too, why is this news? I think the freedom of persecuted people to read and write what they want takes precedence.

    1. Re:Proxies too! by mottie · · Score: 1

      open proxies are harder to find. you can't simply click "next next finish" and be good to go. if you think using your ISP's proxy is anonymous you're very naive.

    2. Re:Proxies too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, if you want to verify it: There is always these guys. ISP's probably aren't going to be willing to turn over too many logs too easily, it just becomes a giant timesink.

  7. Re:My 1000th post! by it_flix · · Score: 0

    Congrats.
    Now please give your home address and telephone no, so we can come and arrest you.
    Sincerely,
    The Governmint

    --
    www.notesmax.com
  8. Of course it can be abused by Brad+Mace · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For a society to be free, it MUST be possible for people to do things that are against the law. That's just how it works. If people do something illegal then you can punish them, but only an extremely facist government could hope to prevent crimes before they occur.

    1. Re:Of course it can be abused by ckimyt · · Score: 3, Informative
      For a society to be free, it MUST be possible for people to do things that are against the law. That's just how it works. If people do something illegal then you can punish them, but only an extremely facist government could hope to prevent crimes before they occur.
      But you don't just want a free society, you want a just society. When people can commit crimes anonymously, there is no punishment.

      So avoid facism, but retain your ability to punish those to actually do break the law.
      --

      Putting the sig back into +1, Insightful since 1995!
    2. Re:Of course it can be abused by PakProtector · · Score: 1

      Seriously. I've recently started a website that has an online forum (what, you were expecting a link? I'm not eager for a /.'ing) after a schism with another online forum, and I've gotten wave after wave of trolls coming over and wrecking the place.

      I had most of them banned, and the ones with static IP addresses banned by the IP, and then one of them brilliantly discovered the use of proxies and anonymous surfing sites (it was brilliant for a bunch of trolls, atleast), and I was back at square one.

      I'm rather cynical about Government, being a Rational Anarchist (and no, it's not an oxymoron, thank you,) but you do not want people to do things without the possiblity of reprisal. That's the whole reason the law works -- bad things can happen to you. And as anyone who has ever had a website defaced or completely ruined and valuable data and off-site backups (off-site from your home, that is) lost, you'll see why.

      However, the problem isn't with Proxies -- they're just a tool, and like any other tool you can use them for good or evil. You can use a hammer to build a house, or to bash your best mate's skull in. That doesn't mean we should ban hammers.

      The Problem is with People. And the problem is so prolific on the internet because you can do things on the internet that in real life would get the crap beaten out of you.

      After all, if you walked into a bar and started calling everyone in it faggots, you'd probably wind up with a cracked skull. And since these people called 'Trolls' can't do these things in real life, they do them online.

      This problem, this use of things in wrong or evil manners, will not change until humanity itself changes, and the more and more I age the more and more I learn about Humanity, and the more and more I realise that this change will most certainly never come about willingly, or easily, because I've learned that the vast amount of people are a) lazy, and b) unconcerned with personal betterment.

      That, and they just don't care.

      --

      Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
      man: no entry for woman in the manual.
      "Qua!?"

    3. Re:Of course it can be abused by Locke2005 · · Score: 1
      Absolutely! Those fascist laws against my killing someone who is just asking for it should be abolished! The government is infringing on my right to bitch-slap anybody that pisses me off!

      While I agree that fewer laws would be better for society, I can't agree with your statement that "it MUST be possible for people to do things that are against the law". If people do things that harm other people, they should be punished in proportion to the harm done and the probability of getting caught. If nobody is harmed by the action, then there should be no law against it. I simply can't condone any action that harms another human being. As a philisophical ideal I personally beleive that people have a right to harm themselves, therefore there should have been no law against using Orkut to conduct this business in the first place. Well meaning others may disagree about the right to harm oneself, and therefore feel selling drugs should rightfully be illegal.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    4. Re:Of course it can be abused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Absolutely! Those fascist laws against my killing someone who is just asking for it should be abolished!
      Really? How many laws out there prevent you from killing someone (as opposed to punishing you after the fact)? Reread the OP's post, then feel stupid as you realize you're agreeing with him.
    5. Re:Of course it can be abused by SiliconEntity · · Score: 1

      The Problem is with People. And the problem is so prolific on the internet because you can do things on the internet that in real life would get the crap beaten out of you. After all, if you walked into a bar and started calling everyone in it faggots, you'd probably wind up with a cracked skull.

      You need to distinguish between someone who provides unpleasant information and someone who engages in physical assault. Calling people names is not grounds for cracking skulls or any such response. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me."

      It is one of the strengths of the Internet that thugs can no longer beat people up because they don't like what they say. The fact that you are unhappy about this reflects more on you than on users of Tor.

    6. Re:Of course it can be abused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I see... so that fact that it is illegal in the US to say "I'm going to kill the president!" is prima facia evidence that the US has "an extremely facist government", because obviously they are trying to prevent a crime by sending the Secret Service to knock on your door...

      I agree that people shouldn't be punished because they probably will commit a crime in the future, but at some point the probability of them creating a crime becomes high enough that you probably should infringe on their rights to protect others from harm. By your logic, even if the government had advance warning that Timothy McVeigh was going to bomb a federal building, they still should not have arrested him until after he set off the bomb, since he hadn't yet killed anybody...

    7. Re:Of course it can be abused by groman · · Score: 1

      They shouldn't have had the power to arrest him, no. The very thought that 99.9% of the population of the world thinks that "intending to commit a crime" should be a crime is chilling. They can still prevent him from doing so by killing him and then going to jail for it. As long as no government resources are involved, what's the problem?

    8. Re:Of course it can be abused by Flower · · Score: 1
      Oh bull. You're entirely missing the point.

      The negative to anonymity is that immature or socially maladjusted individuals can destroy the signal to noise ratio in a forum with impunity. The criteria you are "distinguishing" by isn't even relevent in the example shown. The hypothetical tool crying faggot to everyone is not providing unpleasant information. He is purposefully inciting the people around him. Mr. Tool is abusing his freedom of expression and in the non-anonymous setting a variety of social pressures can be applied against him to correct or remove his behavior ranging from ostricizing him, publically deriding him, kicking him out of the bar and, yes, up to the afore mentioned cracked skull whether warranted or not. The social group our hypothetical example has entered can choose to deal with him. This is normal. It's real life and in the example provided I would say it is fair. He isn't providing any "information" and it isn't like he can pretend there are no consequences to his actions. Just because the GP used an extreme example of a consequence doesn't mean his point isn't valid.

      One of the strengths of the Internet is that actual oppressed populations can get their story out to the world. The price we pay for this currently is that an extremely vocal minority of maladjusted people abuse this ability to inflate their level of self-importance. The fact that you seem to twist this abdication of responsibility for self-gratification as "providing unpleasant information" speaks volumes.

      --
      I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
    9. Re:Of course it can be abused by tolkienfan · · Score: 1
      3, Interesting
      -22 Idiotic

      "But you don't just want a free society, you want a just society."
      No we want a free society. People have been fighting for freedom throughout the ages.
      Most people here in the US have relatives who died giving us this freedom.

      You want justice at the expense of freedom, go live somewhere else - like a police state, with ID cards, where the authorities have a right to search anyone and sieze anything.
      Where they can identify suspected dissenters by tracking their reading material. And where they handle them by making them silently vanish.

      Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
      Benjamin Franklin

      "When people can commit crimes anonymously, there is no punishment."

      You obviously haven't encountered many criminals. They aren't in the habit of (intentionally) identifying themselves.

    10. Re:Of course it can be abused by krunk4ever · · Score: 1

      that totally felt like a line straight out of minority report. *shivers*

    11. Re:Of course it can be abused by Mard · · Score: 1

      "but only an extremely facist government could hope to prevent crimes before they occur."

      And I quote:
      "So we had to make a shift in the way we thought about things. So being reactive, waiting for a crime to be committed or waiting for there to be evidence of the commission of a crime, didn't seem to us to be an appropriate way to protect the American people." - John Ashcroft; June 5th, 2003

      --
      DRM = Digitally Restricted Media. This is a viral sig, pass it on.
    12. Re:Of course it can be abused by PakProtector · · Score: 1

      Sir, I don't celebrate Christmas, but I do think I am going to have to get you a gift this year.

      --

      Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
      man: no entry for woman in the manual.
      "Qua!?"

    13. Re:Of course it can be abused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The very thought that 99.9% of the population of the world thinks that "intending to commit a crime" should be a crime is chilling.

      Exactly, I have urges in my mind to commit crimes, and play them out in my head every day. Sometimes my subconscious actually takes over and I start to do that crime, I almost stabbed someone once (in my head, not actually started to pull the knife up, I only had the knife in my hand (it was already in my hand)) (and I wasn't even pissed off at him!) before my real mind kicked in and realized what I was doing.

      Does that mean I committed a crime? No. Does that mean I'm mentally unstable? Maybe... I should probably see someone about that.

    14. Re:Of course it can be abused by deaddrunk · · Score: 1

      Your government (and mine) scares the crap out of me.

      --
      Does a Christian soccer team even need a goalkeeper?
  9. RBL tor nodes? by blueskies · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If it becomes a large enough of a problem, i can see people firewalling based apon a list of tor nodes.

    1. Re:RBL tor nodes? by TheTomcat · · Score: 1


      Like this?

      S

  10. Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let's all demonize useful technology before it gets out of the gate! Next year we can all mourn the loss of Sourceforge when it's 'determined' to be a repository for terrorist software development. Oh god, won't somebody help me off of this slippery slope?!

    1. Re:Fantastic! by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh god, won't somebody help me off of this slippery slope?!

      Just as well. Slippery slope is a logical fallacy anyway.

    2. Re:Fantastic! by poopdeville · · Score: 1

      It's also an accurate empirical observation regarding human nature.

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
    3. Re:Fantastic! by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      Just as well. Slippery slope is a logical fallacy anyway.

      It may be a common argument, but the concept that things will generally continue to exhibit the same behavior is a pretty reasonable line of thought.

      It's easy to *call* something a fallacy, but think about the implications here. Calling the "slippery slope" argument a fallacy is like calling all of statistics a fallacy.

      I think the "slippery slope" "fallacy" is basically a way to allow one person to control the debate about a subject to their advantage. Actions have implications, and those actions in turn have implications.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    4. Re:Fantastic! by TerminaMorte · · Score: 1

      Stop blamming the people who ban tor nodes from their network.

      The real problem is with the tor nodes who give unrestricted access. If you're running a node in order for people to be able to browser the web anonymously, then
      WHY WOULD YOU ALLOW TRAFFIC TO PORT 22 OR 6667?

      Most tor nodes don't restrict traffic, and are irresponsible. Don't belive me? Check it out for yourself:

      http://serifos.eecs.harvard.edu:8000/cgi-bin/exit. pl?ports=6667&addr=1&textonly=1

    5. Re:Fantastic! by coopex · · Score: 1

      Wow! You took philosophy 100 too!

      Yeah, it's a logical fallacy, whop de doo, you know the name of some arguement technique agreed upon by ivory towered professors. It's still a valid to use in a debate considering that emperically it has a very high chance of being true to a small or large degree.

      Pointing out that Bush was a C student cokehead is an ad homiem attack, yet it's a perfectly reasonable point about his competency given that he's the President.

      There are more things in heaven and earth, Jeff DeMaagd, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

      --
      The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
  11. Give people anonymity and... by RUFFyamahaRYDER · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Give people anonymity and of course they are going to do bad things with it. The net is as anonymous as it needs to be. I see this only causing more trouble and headaches...

    1. Re:Give people anonymity and... by Keamos · · Score: 1

      Just more proof to John Gabriel's Internet Fuckwad Theory, the gift that just keeps on giving...

    2. Re:Give people anonymity and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shaddup, asshole!

      (j/k, for the humor-impared)

    3. Re:Give people anonymity and... by m0nk3ym1nd · · Score: 1

      Extending that argument a bit -- Give people in government anonymity and of course they are going to do bad things with it -- especially when you toss in righteousness and a paycheck. Did you notice the House (USA) just extended the Patriot Act, giving anonymous people a paycheck to watch my web traffic in case I do something bad. Shouldn't we thwart such abuse?against such abuse? Shouldn't the billions whose web traffic is so heavily filtered they don't even know we're having this discussion be invited to the table?

      (Changing the subject slightly -- the irony! Running Tor, my post was blocked -- "Your IP address has been used to abuse the system...." heh.)

  12. WOW... by Doc+Squidly · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    ...You have no life.

    Mod me as Troll, I don't need Good Karma.

    --
    I think I think, therefore I think I am.
  13. Religion, cultural references... by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    Wasn't Thor part of the Norde mythology? What's Taoism got to do with it?

    Of course, i could be wrong, and the yin / yang mentioned by the submitter is just out of topic.

    1. Re:Religion, cultural references... by Ulven · · Score: 1

      Thor was, yes. Tor is 'The Onion Network' and has no mythological origins whatsoever.

      The Ying-Yang is emphasising the fact that it can be used for good or bad, just like every other tool ever invented.

    2. Re:Religion, cultural references... by ThJ · · Score: 1

      I don't know if the grandparent is Scandinavian and was trying to point out what I am about to: There are two spellings for the name. Tor and Thor. I have a friend named Tor, my own name is Thor and we both pronounce our first names in the same way (IPA).

    3. Re:Religion, cultural references... by Ulven · · Score: 1

      Well, you learn something new everyday. Thanks for pointing it out.

  14. Can't be all good by Neil+Blender · · Score: 2, Funny

    Because the slashcoders worked overtime to ban posting to slashdot from as many tor servers as they could find.

    You can't post to this page.

  15. Directory Servers - the Achilles heel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if I am a Commie/Fascist dictator hell-bent on Internet censorship (think Hu Jintao) and I'm afraid of Tor, then all I have to do is block all IP access to the directory servers? That should solve the problem once and for all, right?

    If so then Tor is only as good as the access to the directory servers for the hundreds of millions of individuals groaning under the yoke of the Commie-Fascist dictatorships all over the world.

  16. Solution is obvious by hobotron · · Score: 2, Funny


    Whitedust commented that the flaws in Tor could be fixed by moving away from the Onion network to an extended "Onion Ring" network.

    --
    There is truth in humor.
  17. the need by Amouth · · Score: 0, Insightful

    tell me exactly what is the point of this tech if not the be bad with it.. any good thing doesn't require you to hide behind anything. personaly i think people should be fully accountable for what they do.. allowing them to remove that they will just move to doing bad things. i know it can be used for good but so can just doing it normaly.. i under stand the reason behind it - it is neet, but it is only going to be abused.

    --
    '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    1. Re:the need by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Informative

      any good thing doesn't require you to hide behind anything.

      Well for example, it can be used by dissidents to safely express their political views, be it in the PRC, Burma or the United States...

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:the need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tell me exactly what is the point of this tech if not the be bad with it

      I know exactly what you mean. I certainly see no need to remain anonymous.

    3. Re:the need by mph_az · · Score: 1

      It could be used for that, but it's mostly being used to harass legitamate internet users.

      There's a huge difference between what it could be used for and what it is being used for; and what it is being used for isn't worth putting up with the 0.0001% legitimate useage.

    4. Re:the need by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's a huge difference between what it could be used for and what it is being used for; and what it is being used for isn't worth putting up with the 0.0001% legitimate useage.

      Tell that Kin Yu Jong who's being at risk of being arrested any moment now because he dared write "uh, I dunno, but maybe Tiananmen wasn't so groovy after all" in his fanzine.

      Only well-fed and wealthy people like you who live in relative safety in their countries have the luxury to think their comfort rates higher than the needs of the oppressed.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    5. Re:the need by poopdeville · · Score: 1

      How on earth would you know? Reports like the one in TFA don't exactly give you a random sampling of Tor users.

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
    6. Re:the need by Wizzmer · · Score: 1

      "tell me exactly what is the point of this tech if not the be bad with it.."

      What is it good for? To surf the net anonymously. If you live in China, or soon in the EU, that can be a problem. The upcoming EU laws on data retention means that your ISP will keep track of what web pages you request, probably by forcing the customer to go through a central proxy. Some suggest that the ISPs should be allowed to use this information for commercial purposes to help offset their added costs. Now there's something that puts the GMail profiling to shame...

      But hey, it will keep the tigers ... eh... terrorists away. Not.

    7. Re:the need by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Complete accountability is wonderful in theory, but problematic in practice. First, even theoretically, it can only work if everyone is held accountable. If you're accountable to the police, but the police are not accountable to the people they serve, then anonymity might be required in order to report corruption and whatnot.

      Now let's move on to practice. Say you want to do something pretty much harmless, but frowned upon by society at large, like lighting up a joint, having sex with your girlfriend, or killing a hobo with a ball-peen hammer. If society bans certain acts arbitrarily and irrationally, then you shouldn't have to be "accountable" to that sort of insanity.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    8. Re:the need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe you're sitting on Score:0 there. If I had mod points, I'd mod you up.

      Hint to those with points: He's posting AC. It's funny. Laugh.

  18. mod parent funny! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The content of parent post is, of course, quite serious but I just died laughing at the irony of your post itself taking the form of a slippry slope fallacy.

  19. RIAA Alert by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    RIAA Alert
    Tor
    KILL
    KILL
    KILL

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  20. My thoughts on Tor. by Captain+Scurvy · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Tor is a good idea, and maybe even a step in the right direction, but it is by no means a "solution" for true Net anonymity and/or privacy. In fact, it is a better tool for attack anonymity than it is for privacy.

    Call me paranoid, but I don't trust anyone other than the intended recipient to decrypt any sensitive data. The way I understand the program to work (correct me if I'm wrong) is that a "trusted" server on the end decrypts your packets and acts as the "proxy" between the tor network and the Internet. What if those trusted servers is compromised? Being so centralized, they make a good way to glean a lot of personal info.

    Now, if you don't care about your data privacy, and just care about a hard to trace connection (i.e., for an attack, but there are plenty of other legitimate reasons), then Tor is pretty cool. However, since there are presently so few servers, and a lot of people DO seem to use Tor to crapflood IRC/forums/etc, it seems like more and more people are just banning the Tor IP addresses.

    1. Re:My thoughts on Tor. by ahsect8 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're misunderstanding the protocol. The purpose is to anonymize connections versus content.

      An example scenario: a US intelligence agent may need to contact an agency server from within a foriegn country. Anyone sniffing packets would notice that a user is connecting to a server at www.someagency.mil, even if the content itself was encrypted. Tor anonymizes the connection, as the agent now connects to one of any number of Tor nodes. Tor uses encryption to protect route and address information, not content. It should be used in conjunction with another strong encryption protocol (SSL etc.).

    2. Re:My thoughts on Tor. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The way I understand the program to work (correct me if I'm wrong) is that a "trusted" server on the end decrypts your packets and acts as the "proxy" between the tor network and the Internet.

      1) You don't have to use any particular node or nodes as "trusted". There is no centralization in architecture, only in default configuration.
      2) The trusted node can be the intended recipient.
      3) You should be using encryption anyway if you care about protecting your data.

  21. Re:oh my gosh... by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1
    That's "yin," not "ying."

    Maybe it's "Xing".

    Oh, sorry, that's an MP3 encoder.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  22. Attack platform? Give me a break. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    You have got to be kidding me. I can barely use Tor to surf for porn at work, its so damn slow. IRC? Ya, it crawls too. This is using US tor servers too - good luck if one of the routers in the route is in some high speed country like bangladesh. Tor is a great idea maybe, but as it stands right now is so slow its not even funny.

  23. More spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whitedust are becoming quite the spammers. Posting several things to /. that have been covered before in a way that just advertises their site

  24. Penny Arcade explains it all by crimethinker · · Score: 0, Troll
    Normal person + anonymity + audience = Total Fuckwad

    I guess we're seeing here that the size of the audience doesn't really matter, if at all.

    -paul

    --
    Pistol caliber is like religion: everyone has their favourite, and theirs is the only right choice.
    1. Re:Penny Arcade explains it all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut your face, shitcock.

  25. WHICH real email address? by mph_az · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One of my 8 yahoo ones, or one of my 10 gmail accounts, or my 4 hotmail accounts or the mailinator account I'm about to make up for the next online form I come across that requires a 'valid email address'?

    Or do you mean the 'real' email address that belongs to one of the more obscure web-based email services?

    Real authentication is impractical in large numbers; this is why it has never been implemented. It barely worked when you sent a photo copy of your drivers' license in to your local BBS; but now, in the age of instant graticication and an international scale (how *can* you tell that ID from istanbul is fake or not?) it's flat out of the question.

    To repeat the point; when it comes to the internet, real authentication is impossible.

    1. Re:WHICH real email address? by dgatwood · · Score: 1
      The point is that an extra layer of authentication makes it harder. Nothing makes it impossible, but at some point, it becomes hard enough that most people planning to do stupid things (crapfloods, spam, trolls, etc.) won't bother unless they're making a lot of money doing it.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:WHICH real email address? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      You are forgetting about the @sshole factor.There are WAY to many people out there that just LOVE to hassle,start trouble,And generally be an @sshole. It doesn't matter how hard you make it,If someone can use it to make someone elses life miserable they WILL find a way.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  26. Not if he means "Up Yours" by winkydink · · Score: 1

    which I have always heard descibed as ying-yang

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

  27. Latency hurts, however... by nweaver · · Score: 4, Informative

    A: Tor is a documented protocol. If you really REALLY want to block Tor on your network, configure your IDS to recognise the protocol setup, and kill THAT.

    B: You can't quake through Tor. Tor only supports TCP, and it adds a fair bit of latency to boot.

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
    1. Re:Latency hurts, however... by Dark+Coder · · Score: 1

      Wrong side of the equation. WTFA.

      A> It is the proxy TOR that is sprouting attack packets. Not the TOR network itself. TOR is a carrier, AND a emitter of attack launch platform. You talk only of a stopping the carrier network which is usually beyond your reach.

      B> Quake will works through TOR using port redirector and a IP tunnel that works perfectly fine across UDP/TCP boundary. (although why would ANY serious gamer want to do this)

  28. Solves problems here and abroad by powerline22 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I live in the USA, and I use it all the time at my high school. Why? My high school thinks it prudent to block many sites such as hackaday.com and coxandorkum.com. I also used it when I was in china to bypass the great firewall to check my evil capitalist college email.

    I think that if anyone is being blocked from visitng any site, anywhere, they should use this to show how stupid and ineffective filters are, especially in schools. Why bother to educate responsibility on the internet when you can force it on kids!

    1. Re:Solves problems here and abroad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      burglar/car alarms are also ineffective for people intent on taking your stuff, but for most criminals/opportunists it serves as a deterrant ie: its too much hassle to overcome for the risk of being caught

      you might have the tech savvy to skirt round school filters but i would bet 90% of your school have neither the desire or capability to mess around with config files, proxies and other such tools just so they can visit bannedsite.net on a lunchhour

      if people are determined enough they can evade any security measures, but for the most people dont, they just cant be bothered

    2. Re:Solves problems here and abroad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I live in the USA, and I use it all the time at my high school. Why? My high school thinks it prudent to block many sites such as hackaday.com and coxandorkum.com. I also used it when I was in china to bypass the great firewall to check my evil capitalist college email.


      So you went to college before you went to high school? Uhm...?
    3. Re:Solves problems here and abroad by powerline22 · · Score: 1

      its called being accepted into college and getting a college email

  29. Trust anyone you like by poptones · · Score: 1

    You can tell tor what type of nodes to connect to, you don't have to just use "trusted nodes." It comes OOTB like that, but all it takes is a quick edit.

    If you are sending unencrypted traffic over tor and you really have a need for anonymity you are stoopid anyway and you will die. If you are doing something that could cost you your freedom you need more than one layer - and tor, no matter how big the onion, is still just one layer.

  30. Tor is like a bazooka... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...you can use it to protect your family from dangerous animals (deer, frog hoards, and spiders...I hate spiders), or you can kill people, which is wrong.

  31. Yin *and* Yang by pedantic+bore · · Score: 1
    To be pedantic... it's never a question of one or the other, since they are each others dual.

    Anonymity conceals identity. People who commit crimes often don't want to get caught, so anonymity is something they desire.

    Nothing to see here; move along.

    --
    Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
  32. A little sensitive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every Slashdot article since the beginning of time has had at least one typo. I've seen Slashdot editors misspell the word "the". That doesn't make them cultural idiots.

    1. Re:A little sensitive? by jvagner · · Score: 1

      The general sloppiness here drives me crazy. I'd be happy for a decent /. alternative, but it is unique in it's category.

      It's not like the stories are expedited from submission to posting.. the editors here get paid money, and for that they should strive towards something better and more respectable. How hard would it be to spell-check submissions? Not hard at all.

      And there's fundamentally a difference between fat-fingering "the" (which should get caught) and not knowing enough to spot "yin-yang". Perhaps it's time they hired an online copy-editor. It wouldn't cost them much, and maybe the volume of postings dedicated to "slashdot sucks" could be alleviated. Their advertisers alone should complain, because the valid "slashdot sucks" posts constitute a kind of click-fraud.

      Yeah, a little much, but...

  33. Off Topic by PakProtector · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    In response to your .sig: What about those of us who realise that a .45 is better for stopping someone on PCP than a .22, but a .22 is better for a Mob-Style, back of the head, execution?

    Not that I've ever done either of those. Oh, no.

    What, you think I'm lyin'? You callin' me a liar?

    /me draws his .45

    You callin' me a liar, issat i-

    /me puts his .45 away...

    Er...

    --

    Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
    man: no entry for woman in the manual.
    "Qua!?"

  34. obsessing on annonimity by slashdotnickname · · Score: 1

    There's only two types of people that would bother with annonymous internet usage... those doing something they fear might get them in trouble, and those that fear being monitored regardless if they're doing anything bad or not... either way, annonymous internet usage is somewhat a product of fear.

    Not saying there's anything wrong with acting on fear, but it can't be healthy to live always fearing "Oh no they might see me reading /." or whatnot.

    1. Re:obsessing on annonimity by frankm_slashdot · · Score: 1

      as much as some people might call that flamebate.. its still basically 100% accurate...

      theres always the third group who "likes to be different" and test the boundaries of the law... but that group isnt really big enough to count....

      it does suck though to live in land where the freedom was paid for with more deaths than id want to count... yet - where everyones getting the opinion that its ok to have some freedoms taken away if it makes you safer... which is basicallyk why people dont fuss about the little laws....

      ie: its illegal for me to photograph pictures of my family on the verazano bridge because they're afraid that i could be a terrorist and ill use the photos for my evil plot. same thing when i took my family on their first speedline ride to the city.. the conductor was warning us about pictures being taken and that wed have them comfiscated at the next stop by police offercers...

      i think things like tor are basically a way for those in that small margin (the ones we didnt count) (who are incidentally the driving forces) to feel like they can have at least a little freedom elsewhere.. one taken away, so build one that cant be taken away so easily.

      i dunno.. its all a pretty lame argument that always boils down to the fact that our forefathers were commiting treason when they fought for their freedom and now anyone in the US who trys to carve out a little of their own freedoms are being labeled unpatriotic.... its sad..

    2. Re:obsessing on annonimity by __aadhrk6380 · · Score: 1

      I gotta wonder where the hue and cry would be if the government was cracking down on Tor instead of a fellow network admin.

      Having said that, there are any number of legitimate reasons for using this technology, many of which have already been noted on here. Let's take a slightly different look at things:

      There's only two types of people that would bother with annonymous internet usage... those doing something they fear might get them in trouble, and those that fear being monitored regardless if they're doing anything bad or not... either way, annonymous internet usage is somewhat a product of fear.

      Why not disable the AC option for posting on Slashdot. After all, that more or less falls within your lines of reasoning. For whatever reason, lot's of folks on /. post AC for certain stories, and I respect that. Sometimes, you just don't want to get flamed for a view, and I don't have a problem with that.

      Using technology to secure your site surfing is an extension of the AC concept.

      As for being open to abuse, isn't that pretty much the same for email? The vast majority of email users aren't hawking viagra, but they are subject to a flood of crap by those that are. Ditto the vast majority of Tor users.

      Tor is a valid tool with a valid function. It also has a choke point for those sites or admins that wish to choke it. Trust me on that.

      I had to drop Privoxy (using Tor) to make this post. That is the policy of this site and I don't have a problem with that either.

      But with Tor running through Privoxy, I could still read the comments and stories.

    3. Re:obsessing on annonimity by revolution1901 · · Score: 1

      there could be a situation someday where even you and your loved ones had something to fear from people knowing what you were reading and expressing, as well as knowing with whom you interacted. that fear could be real and major, not imagined and insignificant.

      and you're right, living in fear isn't healthy. but the world is full of massive amounts of oppression and suffering and it is difficult for some to not live in fear every day.

      so, while the geeks of the world have privilege and resources and inherent interest in developing technology, they may as well create technology that can be used by those who have legitimate need for it. and, of course, some of those geeks probably do have "legitimate" need for it, also. and, further, tomorrow may bring a need for it to those who do not have such a need today.

      you are a very lucky person to not be able to imagine people fearing worse than "Oh no they might see me reading /." i hope you and your family appreciate what you have and i wish everyone could live is such peace.

  35. Re:oh my gosh... by TCM · · Score: 1

    Oh, sorry, that's an MP3 encoder.

    No, it's not. It's an atrocity claiming to be one.

    --
    Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
  36. tor countermeasures by bani · · Score: 1

    an RBL populated with the tor master list.

    a BGP feed of tor hosts.

    anyone game?

  37. Mod parent -1 flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only well-fed and wealthy people like you who live in relative safety in their countries have the luxury to think their comfort rates higher than the needs of the oppressed.

    For christ's sake PLEASE tell me you don't actually buy the shit you're shovelling there.

    When the script kids bury the legitimate posts, your ficitious chinaman's post is buried right along with them. When they flood out an IRC channel, his message is flooded out as well.

    Nice troll, however, kudos to ya.

  38. So what.. by sillybilly · · Score: 1

    Any technology that empowers people can be used both for good and bad. Fire, knives, cars, gas, etc. Tor is not something that's likely to cause an end to the world, there are a lot more potent things to worry about.

  39. Tor, or trust the US Navy with your privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember, Tor was made by the US Navy.

    I wouldnt trust it with my privacy.

  40. first open relays for smtp now this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry I ever donated money to the eff. First gilmore refused to close his open-spam-relay claiming some political dissident might need to use it to get vital messages out and now we have the same crap at the TCP level. Who needs microsoft to write a virus-loving OS that is regularly abused by spammers and micreants when you have folks like the EFF writing *nix code that does the same darn thing? Whatever happened to the idea that good internet neighbors don't help urchins abuse the rest of the net?

  41. IRCops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most networks only let you register a handful of nicks. You should have gotten an IRCop to K-line the guy. #services, #help or similar

  42. a large and moving tor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    many shubs and zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the tor that day I can tell you.

  43. Product built using Tor... by Afecks · · Score: 1

    If you want a complete all-in-one Tor platform, look no further, Tor Desktop.

  44. The Tor Abuse FAQ by Nick+Mathewson · · Score: 1

    The Tor project has a FAQ about abuse, from the perspective of Tor server operators and other folks on the internet. Of particular interest are:

    Also of interest on the main Tor FAQ is:

    Basically, Tor goes through some effort in order to be easy to block, by making sure that you can easily get a list of exactly the Tor nodes that allow connections to your servers. If you don't think people who want privacy belong on your service, you don't need to support them; it's your service after all. (Some people have already written RBL-like tools, but I haven't seen any that I like so far; all the ones I've seen list all Tor servers, even the ones that do not permit outgoing connections and so cannot deliver unwanted connections.)

    On the other hand, if you do think that privacy is a useful thing, there are ways to allow anonymous users without allowing unlimited abuse. See the first link above.

  45. You have got to be kidding me. by atomm1024 · · Score: 1

    Tor is completely open-source and peer-reviewed. The protocol is documented, and there is already at least one third-party implementation (JAP) that can access the same network. You really think it has evil Government spyware in it? Give me a break.

    --
    Signature.
    1. Re:You have got to be kidding me. by sirReal.83. · · Score: 1

      If you haven't already, read Trusting Trust. Interesting, at least.

  46. There's good and bad by suitepotato · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not much you can do about it. Encryption, anonymous remailers, proxies, all can be used for good and bad purposes. So can speech, religion, press, arms, etc.

    Either we stand up to our responsibilities as adults and advanced and civilized people with a sense of honor, propriety, and duty, and chase criminals and terrorists while playing by the traditions, rules, regulations, and laws... or we dispense with our rights, liberties, and privileges in the name of safety and prevention of infractions.

    As we all well know, you cannot trade freedom for security and we'll be damned if we do. We can only try to find ways to stop the abuse but I sincerly hope people do not seek to go beyond that. I use Tor to get out of my subnet when it is blacklisted due to abuse activities by people also on the subnet. Why should I suffer for some arse's misbehavior? I also use it to keep my privacy when dealing with places where locals tend to have more than a touch of nastiness and vindictiveness.

    The Internet is crawling with bad people. We shouldn't hesitate to use the privacy technologies availible to defend ourselves and we shouldn't be looking askance at them because some people abuse them. People abuse just about anything. That's human nature. Should we live in padded rooms in underground bunkers?

    --
    If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
  47. Re:oh my gosh... by game+kid · · Score: 1
    Brooke Shields: Tall Princeton honors student.

    You forgot hot. It's Shields by a mile.

    By the way, where are the obligatory Whisper Song jokes? (Though I doubt none of us, nevermind the Ying Yang Twins, would consider "Wait 'till ya see my traceroute" to be funny.)

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  48. AnonymOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, some people from kaos theory security research are developing a project called the AnonymOS which encrypts and anonymizes all traffic through tor along with using a very hardened bsd / linux system that drops all packets that aren't based on a connection that you have established. They did a presentation about this at interz0ne 4 http://interz0ne.com/ . The presentation is here http://theory.kaos.to/projects.html .

    Honestly though, I could care less what 'could' be or has been done with anonymous access to the internet. I would rather have complete anonymity than have a bunch of governments attempting to regulate and track every individual.

  49. Too bad... by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

    I wish there was a "Understated" moderation point I could give.

    IRC is great and all, but it is at the outer edges of the online universe to say the least.

  50. More like Theological Idiots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Satori's next to nothing so they say!

    Muddle

  51. Re:oh my gosh... by scaryjohn · · Score: 1
    Maybe it's "Xing". Oh, sorry, that's an MP3 encoder.

    That's just LAME! ... D'oh!

    --
    One might ask the same about birds. What ARE birds? We just don't know.
  52. oooh, scary by foobario · · Score: 1

    You can beat someone to death with a Subway sandwich, if you are determined enough. Should we stop eating sandwiches so everyone will be safer?

  53. Anonymity - For Great Justice by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 1

    If you don't want to be swallowed whole by your government, like in China, you have to be able to have the ability to remain 100% anonymous, no exceptions. Because the moment you give anyone the power to remove the cloak of anonymity, you destroy anonymity from tyrants completely.

    I find arguments against online anonymity to be silly, usually taking two tracks:

    A) Hackers will attack us!
    B) Bad guys (usually meaning pedophiles) will hide there!

    B is a given. I support the death penalty for pedophiles (even though I generally don't support the death penalty as it is applied currently), but you have to expect that with anonymity, people are going to do things you don't agree with. That's the entire point of anonymous, is so that people who disagree with you can't track you down and throw you in jail... like living in China and proclaiming that the government there is corrupt.

    A is naive. It's the weakness of the protocol/service that must be fixed. Hackers will always be anonymous, and you can never prevent that. Either by hijacking other machines or whatever, it is nearly a fundamental law of digital information. This is no reason to deny it to those using it for free speech purposes.

    With respect to the principle of anonymity and privacy, I believe the good outweighs to bad, regardless of any bad someone can show me. Let the drug smugglers and terrorists plot online. That doesn't bother me (in the sense that use of the service bothers me, though the plotting itself does bother me). They can just as easily plot in a closed room or cave in the desert. What does bother me, is that these will be the excuses used to end all reasonable privacy and mark the beginning of placing all spaces under constant surveillance. Without anonymity, tyranny would rule, and would be FAR worse than any private evil anyone can imagine. Think Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Kim Jong-il, etc. Those men were/are worse than 20 Bin Ladens. And the benefits of anonymity to fight evil governments are far greater than the negative benefits to private bad guys.

    "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Thomas Jefferson

    "Four hostile newspapers are more to be feared than a thousand bayonets." - Napoleon Bonaparte

    --
    I8-D
    1. Re:Anonymity - For Great Justice by deaddrunk · · Score: 1

      Do you support the death penalty for other mentally-ill people too? Paedophiles are seriously sick individuals and the system treating them just as common criminals is why there is so much tragedy caused by them. Deal with them in the same way as the criminally-insane, namely sectioned away from those they are a danger too.

      --
      Does a Christian soccer team even need a goalkeeper?
  54. If you don't like it, block it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Worried about being attacked from TOR? Then block it, the exit nodes are listed here: http://serifos.eecs.harvard.edu:8000/cgi-bin/exit. pl?addr=1

  55. Tragedy of the commons by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Someone, I think here on /., said they used to run a TOR server but stopped when they audited their exiting traffic* and found it was mostly spam, warez, and porn.

    If respectable people don't use TOR for respectable things like breaching the Great Firewall of China, then many respectable people will stop running TOR nodes.

    *Traffic that is leaving the TOR network at his node. At this point, it's no longer encrypted.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  56. Hey! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can show me pictures up the ying-yang, and it still won't change my mind.

  57. Re: artistic names by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1
    It's especially nice to use names like sillybilly on slashdot
    What kind of nickname is "sillybilly"?
    Why are you hiding behind a nickname?
    Do you have something to hide?
    You'd never see me hiding behind some ridiculous nickname.

    Your friend,
    some guy I know
    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
  58. Re: artistic names by sillybilly · · Score: 1

    I like this nickname, because it has so many sides. First, it's cute, immature, happy, childish. Childish is someone who is overly honest to the point of innocence and hasn't lost the ability to still wonder at a top spinning, a magnet pushing another one apart, or be like a baby dazzled by the colors and textures spinning before his eyes. 2nd, I tend to get overly serious and grandiose sometimes, and then all you have to do is look at the name, to come back to your senses. Imagine bugs bunny telling you these things. But still, don't evaluate what you read based on the mere name or appearance of who says it. It's a good excersize for you. As far as hiding, yes, I too have a lot to hide, I am nowhere near being a self-actualized person. That doesn't mean I won't boldly go head on in real life under my own full identity. But the nickname is not ridiculous, because it tests your ability to look past it.

  59. Re: artistic names by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1

    My post was meant to be humorous.
    You see, I was criticizing you for using a ridiculous nickname, when my own nickname is just as ridiculous.
    To make this clear, I signed my post, which I normally never do.
    Intentional hypocracy is supposed to be funny here on Slashdot, and, occasionally, elsewhere.
    It's like those posts that begin "Your a moron.", which is a kind of joke because the intentionally mis-spelled "You're" is showing that the person who stated "Your a moron." is also a moron.
    (A similar situation is when someone whose nickname is "Speling Natsi" corrects someone else's spelling, etc.)

    When I was in college, I had a friend of mine, who, whenever anyone said he was positive about something (e.g., "I'm positive that I saw him in the cafeteria."), would sneer, "Only complete idiots are positive."
    I would then ask, "Are you sure?".
    He would reply, "I'm positive!".

    If you understand this kind of humor, then you should know where my post was coming from.

    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana