Slashdot Mirror
Anonymous' WikiLeaks-Like Project Tyler To Launch In December
hypnosec writes "A hacker who claims to be a member of the hacking collective Anonymous has revealed that the hacktivist group is working on a Wikileaks-like service dubbed Tyler and that it will be launched on December 21. The Anonymous member revealed that the service will be decentralized and will be based on peer-to-peer service, unlike Wikileaks, thus making Tyler rather immune to closure and raids. The site will serve as a haven for whistleblowers, where they can publish classified documents and information. The hacker said in an emailed interview that 'Tyler will be P2P encrypted software, in which every function of a disclosure platform will be handled and shared by everyone who downloads and deploys the software.'" That sounds like a lot to live up to. Decentralized, attack-resistant and encrypted all sound nice, but I'm curious both about the funding it would take, and whether it matches Wikileaks' own security.
... you do not talk about Tyler!
It could be a government funded honeypot
What will this do that Freenet does not already do?
This is not about personal privacy.
This is about governments and other public bodies trying to keep secrets from the people who elected them (or, in some cases, didn't elect them). One could argue that this information should be freely available (with reasonable restrictions) but in an effort to cover up and deceive, governments keep the information secret.
Wikileaks seemed to take a lot of effort to prevent personal private information from disclosure.
Many governments have "Freedom of information" laws which specifically grant access to government information so they do recognize that information should be free. However, there is always a battle about where to draw the line with governments wanting to be more restrictive and "the people" wanting more information.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
And then one week later it will be full child porn and paranoid conspiracy theories and very little in the way of leaked documents. Such is the fate of all darknets I guess. (see Tor, Freenet, I2P, etc).
Indeed. Comparing individual privacy interests with government secrecy is a pretty stupid analogy.
Government are not individuals with inalienable rights. They service (or rather should service) their constituents. The only government secrets that are worth keeping are the ones that revealing would actually harm the people, rather than the government.
In an ideal world, there should be no conflict between the people of a democracy and its government...a perfect government would already be serving its people's interests.
Information wanting to be free means that when market forces restrict our access to factual information, like how a PDP-11 allocates memory, that information should be liberated.
Wrong. "Information wants to be free" has nothing to do with "should" any more than "Water wants to flow downhill" does. Both are amoral observations about the world, not a call to action.
It means that it's extremely difficult to keep information contained, because once it gets out, it tends to propagate because there are no natural constraints on its ability to reproduce. e.g. if I tell you a secret, I have forever lost the ability to take it back, and if I don't want it getting out, I have to actively set up artificial barriers to prevent it. Without such barriers, the secret becomes "free" in the sense that I lose control over it.
Whether we should take action to restrain or promote the free flow of information is a completely separate discussion.