Slashdot Mirror
MIT Says Their Anonymity Network Is More Secure Than Tor (pcmag.com)
An anonymous reader writes from a report via PC Magazine: Following the recent vulnerabilities in Tor, researchers at MIT's Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory and the Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne have been working on a new anonymity network that they say is more secure than Tor. While the researchers are planning to present their new system, dubbed Riffle, at the Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium later this month, they did say the system uses existing cryptographic techniques, but in new ways. A series of servers are what make up Riffle, each of which "permutes the order in which it receives messages before passing them on to the next," according to a news release. "For instance, messages from senders Alice, Bob, and Carol reach the first server in the order A, B, C, that server would send them to the second server in a different order -- say C, B, A. The second server would permute them before sending them to the third, and so on." Nobody would know which was which by the time they exited the last server. Both Tor and MIT's anonymity network use onion encryption. Riffle uses a technique called verifiable shuffle in addition to onion encryption to thwart tampering and prevent adversaries from infiltrating servers with their own code. Last but not least, it uses authentication encryption to verify the authenticity of an encrypted message. The researchers say their system provides strong security while using bandwidth much more efficiently than similar solutions.
If you're not breaking the law
The problem is that spreading ideas and information isn't legal.
The communication latency must be even suckier than that of Tor then... Oh, well...
Now, is it really a great new tool for privacy, or does it have inherent back doors and the announcements are to lure us away from Tor, which authorities have found too difficult to break? Will we even ever know?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
This approach does NOT fix the linked "vulnerabilities" about the TOR network, where compromised nodes as members of the network can spy on traffic, and a sufficiently large amount can even totally identify users. This vulnerability is unfixable by systems where you let everyone set up a node.
...but after what you helped the U.S. government do to Aaron Swartz, i.e. drive him to the brink of suicide and then over the edge, I find any claims you make regarding your abilities to be suspect at the very least.
Sad, really, that the name in education that has been synonymous with "hackers" for decades, now serves as one of their worst enemies. Much like CMU aiding the FBI in "discovering" the locations of hidden Tor services (http://www.teaparty.org/academics-accused-helping-fbi-unmask-anonymity-web-users-129406/), MIT and their graduates have shown their true colours...by bending over and taking it from the fascists in Quantico and Washington, by using their talents and their education to take freedom _away_ from the world rather than give. All for the same sort of fat government cheques they were getting in the 80's, making bold claims about how they could implement artificial intelligence sophisticated enough to power Reagan's insane "Star Wars" missile defense system. This in _spite_ of the fact that full debugging of such software would _require_ a world-ending, nuclear war to occur.
Fuck MIT and their shitty software. Say what you want about traitors, most people accept that they aren't to be trusted.
Don't break the law or be a pervert.
Shove it up your ass, you fucking piece of shit. Things like TOR exist to promote free speech everywhere, especially in countries where attempting to express yourself will get you jailed and/or killed. Just because it's also open to be used by people with criminal intent does not mean it's a bad or wrong thing and you're completely and totally out of line to even attempt to demonize it for that reason. So how about you fuck the fuck off, asshole?
How much kitty porn can I transfer per second over it?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Don't challenge the dominant paradigm. Then you won't need encryption!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Isn't illegal... yet. Trump cold still get elected in November, and anybody that can think rationally really pisses him off!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
My guess is some three letter government organization....
Let's face it folks, if privacy and security are important to you, DON'T do it on the Internet. There is no such thing as Privacy and Security on the Internet and that is NEVER going to change. Sure, you can obfuscate and encrypt and maybe buy yourself some time, but as soon as a packet hits your ISP, you had better just figure it's public knowledge because *somebody* could be listening in and you'd never know it.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
I wonder if it's the same country that MIT is in?
If it were truly effective, it would be "born secret" and not released to the public unless it is crippled.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
While I might dislike ISIL propaganda and the anarchists cookbook or Mein Kampf. I don't believe it should be illegal to distribute or read. To say otherwise is starting down the slippery slope of thought crime.
I may not agree with what you say, but Ill defend to the death you're right to say it.
- Kim Jong Il
If we're going to make ideas illegal to distribute I'd love to start with your idiotic ones.
Parent post was made from a comfortable bedroom in a middle-class house in the USA.
Hey faggot, how about we ban all religious texts while we're at it? Look at all the horror and death that's happened because of religion? Also ban all books on science and technology, since that knowledge can help people create weapons. Also all chemistry and biology books, since chemistry and biology can help you make things like bombs and poisons. Also all books about plants, since there are poisonous plants, and sticks from trees with good dense wood can be sharpened into weapons. And all books about geology, since rocks can be used as weapons. Cookbooks are right out, too, since you can make things with commonly found ingredients to make people sick. Any book on medical science is practically a sin, since it involves cutting into people (surgery), injecting things (drug use), and the icky, indecent innrer working of the human body -- only God should know those things! Scout manuals are next, since it's all about making weapons, setting things on fire, etc. No sewing books, either! Needles and scissors are sharp and can be used to KILL PEOPLE, so no clothes for you, either. Any book on self defense should be a jailable offense for obvious reasons. In fact let's remove people's hands and feet, since they're natural weapons. Like medical or biology books, any book talking about nasty, indecent SEX is outlawed -- as is sex itself, since it's just so icky and gross and SINFUL..
Oh, what the hell, let's just outlaw the human race in general. Into the ovens with all seven billion of them! Then there won't be anyone around to possibly offend anyone else, commit any crimes, upset anyone, or otherwise stir up trouble. Problem solved! AC please report to the nearest people-disposal oven immediately, we wouldn't want you setting a bad example!
Spoken like a true cry-bully SJW who wants to dump the 1st, 2nd and 4th amendments into the gutter.
Go start your own fucking country, asshole. You obviously don't understand this one.
I'ts not a coincidence that ISL and Nazi Germany and North Korea and SJWs and all the goddamn petrol-dictatorships in the Middle East BAN SPEECH in JUST they way you want to.
Wake the fuck up and catch up to the 21st century. Free speech is the best known cure to abusive regimes and policies. Why do you think every time you turn around some fascist government or fascist social movement is trying to clamp their hand around somene else's mouth?
Why do you think that is? Because their ideas about How Other People Should Live are vigorously reasoned and empirically sound that they can endure an unflinching examination by unsympathetic observers willing to level withering criticism?
Yeah, that must be it.
Where's the download link?
Where's the exit nodes?
Where's the network?
I don't see a website for Riffle, only a .pdf.
There are even other projects at MIT with the same name. (Riffle water monitoring system)
https://civic.mit.edu/blog/hhcraig/open-water-project-exploring-open-source-water-quality-monitoring
This 'Riffle' is just a paper not an actual network, afaict.
First, Tor would be knowingly aiding and abetting in the distribution and consumption of child pornography.
Other things that aid or abet child pornography:
Let's just focus our attention to that last one.
yeah as if they were critical to it. plus, cameras are all fingerprinted and backdoored just fyi..
MaidSafe's Safe Network is definitely going to change the internet as we know it.
Is the source code available for review? Have significant security reviews taken place? If you're looking for a tor alternative, why not consider EepSites first? They appear highly recommended and have been around much longer. I doubt they're even monitored yet, since I so rarely hear of people using them...
So, the mighty CIA, NSA can't compromise nodes outside USA or set them up?
Do you have a clue about their budget or manpower?
Oh, what the hell, let's just outlaw the human race in general. Into the ovens with all seven billion of them!
No worries. we, the NATO, are working on that...
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
Isn't illegal... yet. Trump cold still get elected in November, and anybody that can think rationally really pisses him off!
Bullshit.
It shouldn't matter WHAT you THINK OR SAY.
You obviously dislike Trump and think he would outlaw some SJW-talk or Black pride or whatever. I don't know how likely that is.
But people who dislike Trump are more likely to want to outlaw talking about the stuff Trump talk about, such as immigration.
Whatever Nazist, Socialist or Islamist rule things could be outlawed and it's not good in either of the situations. People should be free - even if that includes the Nazis, the Socialists and the Islamists - their opinon should just be irrelevant since it's anti-free.
Do you listen to yourself? "People should be free except the ones I've decided shouldn't, because they're against freedom"
That's not what I said?
I said their opinion should be irrelevant. They are still free to have it. They should just not be granted the power to limit the freedom of others. I reject democracy for a free society.