Slashdot Mirror


DOJ Official Tells 100 Federal Judges To Use Tor (vice.com)

The director for the Cybercrime Lab at the Department of Justice urged a roomful of 100 federal judges to use Tor to protect their computers, remembers judge Robert J. Bryan. An anonymous reader quotes a report from Vice: While the US is the biggest funder of the non-profit that maintains the software, law enforcement bodies such as the FBI are exploiting Tor browser vulnerabilities on a huge scale to identify criminal suspects. To add to that messy, nuanced mix, one Department of Justice official recently personally recommended Tor to a room of over a hundred federal judges...

"I almost felt like saying, 'That's not a good way to protect your stuff, because the FBI can go through it like eggshells,'" Bryan continues. Of course, this isn't really true: although the FBI has had some notable successes at identifying criminal suspects on the dark web with technological means, it is not the norm. It's worth remembering Carroll is not the only Justice Department or US law enforcement official to endorse Tor...one FBI agent was also an advocate of Tor.

61 comments

  1. FBI approved eggshells by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    for your honor's consideration

    1. Re:FBI approved eggshells by PRMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Tor kept the Silk Road online for 2 years where without it they would have shut him down immediately. And they found him with old fashioned police work, not Tor hacking.

      They have become better at finding IP leaks to exploit, but to say that they can go through Tor like eggshells is overstating it quite a bit.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    2. Re:FBI approved eggshells by lgw · · Score: 3, Informative

      TOR seems really good at preventing mass harvesting of data by the government. Everything we've seen requires them to make a special effort to hack someone they're interested in, so maybe it's not so useful for high-profile criminal activity. But for doing things today which may be made illegal one day in the future, and your browsing history used against you, it seems to work fine.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    3. Re:FBI approved eggshells by TroII · · Score: 0

      Tor kept the Silk Road online for 2 years where without it they would have shut him down immediately.

      If they'd shut him down immediately he'd probably already be out of prison. They let it go as long as they did so they could pile on more and more charges.

    4. Re:FBI approved eggshells by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TOR seems really good at preventing mass harvesting of data by the government. Everything we've seen requires them to make a special effort to hack someone they're interested in, so maybe it's not so useful for high-profile criminal activity. But for doing things today which may be made illegal one day in the future, and your browsing history used against you, it seems to work fine.

      No you dope your government created TOR!

    5. Re: FBI approved eggshells by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      REMEMBER THE MURDER OF IAN MURDOCH, creator of Debian Linux and leading member of the Free Software community, killed Christmas 2015 by the notoriously corrupt San Francisco police department.

    6. Re:FBI approved eggshells by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      If you use it perfectly it will keep you safe. Use the Tails live CD, ideally through public wifi some distance from where you live. Never, ever enable Javascript. Never make your browser window maximised or full screen. And of course, never reveal any identifying information yourself.

      Makes running a criminal empire difficult, but that's not the design goal. It's great for people looking for uncensored web access, journalists trying to get stories out, whistleblowers leaking information etc. It kept Snowden safe, and you have to assume they were looking for spies in their own ranks and leaking information.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:FBI approved eggshells by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      No you dope your government created TOR!

      Therefore what?

      That the concept of TOR is flawed? Or that sufficient nodes are covertly run by agencies that it makes the whole process null and void?

      It's possible but ... I don't think so.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    8. Re: FBI approved eggshells by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      Where is the evidence that he was killed. I'm as interested as anyone else but ... the more damning the claim the more evidence you need to be able to promote it.

      What is the evidence he was killed?

      What motive was there for his death?

      And why use the police (in uniform) to do it as opposed to another random killing by who-knows-who?

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    9. Re:FBI approved eggshells by Falos · · Score: 1

      This. There's a (frequently understated) distinction between mass automated logging and targeted, active monitoring. Very diligent use of TOR and associated tools/behavior can resist or even outright beat the latter, but most of us are just trying to beat the former, not the latter's scrutiny.

      It's pretty easy (tinfoil check: probably) to get "on a list" but I'm confident (mostly) that getting put under a microscope is very rare and only happens to people involved with large amounts of money, influence (incl politics/dissent), or as parent says, high profile criminal activity, especially re: FBI.

      Again, most of us aren't trying to beat microscopes, just dragnets. There's plenty others aside the FBI's, so we just spew solutions shotgun style and hope some stick. TOR is a good one.

    10. Re:FBI approved eggshells by lgw · · Score: 1

      No you dope your government created TOR!

      And why do you imagine they did so? Can you not think of a government purpose that could be served by allowing someone to "VPN" into a US government server without another government being able to tell that that connection had been made?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    11. Re:FBI approved eggshells by Keybounce · · Score: 1

      *DO* make your browser window full sized.

      The size of the window can be determined by the web site, and used to track people. If your window size is the same as most users, you're just a blip. But if your window size is unique, you stand out as an individual.

    12. Re:FBI approved eggshells by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Maximizing the window reveals monitor resolution and toolbar sizes (by inference from the available rendering area). The Tor browser by default picks a window size that is common, and if you check with fingerprinting tools it's actually less unique than when maximized.

      I tried it a while back. With the default size I got about 1 in 4000 with panopticlick. Maximized that fell to 1 in about 2,000,000, much worse.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    13. Re:FBI approved eggshells by Keybounce · · Score: 1

      Wow.

      Thank you for that. I had assumed that maximum size would be limited only by screen resolution (1024 wide), and common to anyone else with the same monitor size.

  2. HIGHLY ILLEGAL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But consider the source!

  3. One branch of DOJ ... by PPH · · Score: 0

    ... warns its members to protect itself from another branch of the DOJ. That shadow government we've been warning you about is here. Fuck the rule of law, judicial warrants and the Constitution. The FBI is a rogue operation that doesn't obey it's chain of command anymore.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:One branch of DOJ ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >warns its members to protect itself from another branch of the DOJ.

      Christ, no. The judge remarked that Tor was not good for protecting data because he thinks the FBI can easily break it and identify users on it. IOW, if the FBI can hack Tor easily, then so can anyone else with the right expertise and resources.

    2. Re:One branch of DOJ ... by Razed+By+TV · · Score: 1

      Christ, no. The judge remarked that Tor was not good for protecting data because he thinks the FBI can easily break it and identify users on it.

      The director for the Cybercrime Lab at the Department of Justice urged a roomful of 100 federal judges to use Tor to protect their computers

      The director suggested they all use it.
      Judge Bryan disagreed with the usefulness of it because the FBI could possibly compromise it.

    3. Re:One branch of DOJ ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The FBI is a rogue operation that doesn't obey it's chain of command anymore." Well that's BEEN the case, and even the chain of command has BEEN shady...

    4. Re:One branch of DOJ ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christ, no. The judge remarked that Tor was not good for protecting data because he thinks the FBI can easily break it and identify users on it.

      The director for the Cybercrime Lab at the Department of Justice urged a roomful of 100 federal judges to use Tor to protect their computers

      The director suggested they all use it.

      Judge Bryan disagreed with the usefulness of it because the FBI could possibly compromise it.

      Here's the context of the quote from the hearing transcript linked from the TFA"

      Now, there was another very interesting thing that
      occurred at the seminar that I wanted to pass on to you.
      We had a speaker named Ovie Carroll, who is with the
      Cybercrime Laboratory of the Department of Justice. He
      talked to us about data breaches and cybercrimes,
      et cetera. I was surprised to hear him urge the federal judges
      present, a hundred or so of them, that they should use the
      TOR network to protect their personal information on their
      computers, like work or home computers, against data
      breaches, and the like. I did not respond to that. I almost felt like saying,
      "That's not a good way to protect stuff, because the FBI
      can go through that like eggshells." And it also seems to
      me probable, although there is no -- I have no evidence to
      support this, just general experience with these things,
      it appears probable that the material that I suppressed in
      the Michaud case is likely to be the result of some
      non-FBI hacker
      , and likely to be available to the whole
      world. But it is not yet, at least that we know of.

      I don't know if the judge is recalling accurately what the cybercrime lab director said, but on the face of it his statement is stupid and even dangerous. Tor doesn't protect your computer against breaches and it doesn't protect your data. What Tor does, to the extent possible, is to give you anonymity while browsing the internet and that's it. You can still connect to other computers that can install malware on your machine even though you've connected it through Tor. You can still have your network traffic sniffed by an evil exit node. You still have exercise caution and take steps to protect your anonymity beyond just using Tor.

      But its clear from the rest of the quote that he thought that some information that was suppressed from a case he ruled on came from a non-FBI hacker and that it probably was or would be available to the whole world. IOW, the judge believes Tor is vulnerable not only to the FBI, but to other hackers as well.

    5. Re:One branch of DOJ ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's curious though, just a few days ago the FBI had a bunch of their evidence tossed for wiretapping a courthouse without a warrant. Maybe they need a new way in.

  4. Three card monte by BlackSabbath · · Score: 1

    "Our helpful DoJ tech will install Tor on your laptop your honour."

    1. Re:Three card monte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The non DOD version.

  5. OPSEC by tacarat · · Score: 2

    The military should be using it too. I imagine a judge's personal computer habits are wonderful places to score data regarding blackmail material, pending judgements for buying and shorting stocks, etc.

    --
    "Common sense will be the death of us all"
    1. Re:OPSEC by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      I imagine a judge's personal computer habits are wonderful places to score data regarding blackmail material, pending judgements for buying and shorting stocks, etc.

      Many in the Judicial refuse to use the Intertubes at all.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    2. Re:OPSEC by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      The military should *not* be using Tor. Look, unless you're doing some shady dark web stuff, your Tor traffic eventually has to pass through a random exit node which you do not control. It can be controlled by some Russian hacker. Why would you think the military should be ok with that?

    3. Re:OPSEC by No+Longer+an+AC · · Score: 1

      How many of us really have anything blackmail-worthy that would be revealed by our internet usage?

      The worst they could get on me would be some kinky, but legal, porn searches. I wouldn't want everyone in the world to know about that, but if I were a judge I wouldn't let someone blackmail me over it either.

      If the information came out and I had to even address it, I'd simply say "Yeah, I have viewed porn on the internet. So what?"

      Maybe it would be more typical for someone to casually "pirate" movies or TV shows or music. I really doubt the public is going to be very shocked by that either.

      So unless their internet activity involves something like taking bribes or some other abuse of power - or looking at child-porn which most people don't have any desire to do, they really aren't in much of a position to be blackmailed.

      There are surely corrupt judges in the system and ones who maybe just cheat on their spouses, but I'd actually like to think that most of them aren't corrupt. Perhaps I'm naive in thinking that, but for many people as long as we protect our identity and bank acount and credit card information, there really isn't much to fear, is there?

      And if I were a corrupt judge or cheating on my spouse, I would be very careful not to use anything but a burner phone to set up a meeting in person. No text messages and definitely no e-mail would be used.

      And I'm not cheating on my wife, I swear.

    4. Re:OPSEC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The searches you do may be perfectly legal, but how do you know what is on the site that you end up going to. The internet is worldwide and legal standards vary.

    5. Re: OPSEC by tacarat · · Score: 1

      You think their internet connections aren't monitored by foreign interests already? Not just the installations, but the home connections? Maybe it's less of a concern for state side bases, but the ones overseas are a different issue. Besides, you're assuming they couldn't use a private version with known and trusted exits.

      --
      "Common sense will be the death of us all"
    6. Re: OPSEC by tacarat · · Score: 1

      Nothing to hide is different than something to share. Enjoy your burner phone.

      --
      "Common sense will be the death of us all"
    7. Re:OPSEC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Look, unless you're doing some shady dark web stuff, your Tor traffic eventually has to pass through a random exit node
      > which you do not control. It can be controlled by some Russian hacker. Why would you think the military should be ok with that?

      They shouldn't. All they have to do is create their own exit node under their control, which always gets used. Which, btw., blows about 99% of all 'OMG TEH TOR IS BROKEN!!' accusations right out the window. Use the source, folks. If you rely on 'the cloud' you get, what you didn't pay for!

  6. too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    im 14 years ahead of this warning LOL
    and the idiots at torrent freak swore it was safe.....i knew better and ill never tell how i found out..oh and i even once sold a mug inside the usa that had root code of the fbi webserver a year after they illegally attacked my server cause i did not want a war game and give me compensation for businesses i was looking after.

    OH and all they cold do was the same knda DDoS that lolsec was famous for a tip that told me and my brothers and sisters to lay off and away from the anonymous movement...

    regards,
    one of the top hackers of this frakn planet,,,,oh and still have the image we made of that mug too...900+ got sold and shipped before it was ( not taken down) turned so 0 sec code could not be used....

    reason i post this btw..i note all the govt shiill posts of late are real thick ....

    p.s. paybacks are a bitch aren't they ....and yup the 15 year old hard drive stll works and can prove all i say....have a lovely day..

    1. Re:too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you like young girls?

      Why not?

  7. The libraries are the harbinger of privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Support your local library !!!
    http://www.lib-web.org/united-states/public-libraries/
    http://cla.ca/
    https://www.gov.uk/local-library-services

  8. Hi, I am a Russian Tor exit node. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I promise that I won't sniff your traffic going to the sites you're visiting or strip your ssl links and substitute them with regular http or employ any other MITM attacks. So go on, Mr. Federal Judge, you can trust me to NOT intercept any of your sensitive data whatsoever. I promise.

    1. Re:Hi, I am a Russian Tor exit node. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi Russian Tor exit node, I am Windows calling. Your computer have virus. Please install this so we can has fix your computer.

  9. Why would judges need to use TOR? by BitterOak · · Score: 2

    I could understand recommending some sort of full disk encryption product to protect confidential information on their computers, but Tor was designed for something different: anonymous browsing. Why would judges need that as part of their professional duties?

    --
    If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    1. Re:Why would judges need to use TOR? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They need TOR for when they are watching kiddie porn, in between cases.

    2. Re:Why would judges need to use TOR? by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      They need TOR for when they are watching kiddie porn, in between cases.

      Yeah, that's why we all use TOR, but that isn't part of their professional duties. Since a DOJ official is recommending TOR to a room full of judges, I assume it is somehow tied to their work and I'm just curious why judges would need that.

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    3. Re:Why would judges need to use TOR? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming the judge's recollection about what was said at the seminar is correct, then that means that cybercrime lab director just gave 100+ judges some very bad advice. Tor will not stop breaches, it will not protect your data. It will make it difficult to identify the IP origin of your network connection, but that's all it will do.

    4. Re:Why would judges need to use TOR? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      It's probably the usual information decay. "TOR is for privacy and anonymity" becomes "TOR protects your privacy" becomes "TOR protects your data" becomes "TOR keeps hackers from looking at your secret data and using it to blackmail you and take over your computer" becomes "TOR is secure! You must have secure! Computers are so fucking dangerous hackers everywhere OMG we must all secure! We must all TOR!"

      It's like the Barack Obama thing where someone went asking random folks if Barack Obama was still a threat to America. People kept answering yes, "Because he's still out there, and he's a threat, and we haven't stopped him yet." Most people facepalm at idiots not differentiating Barack Obama from Osama bin Laden; and if you think about it long enough (Fridge Logic), you suddenly realize everyone was afraid of Osama bin Laden "because he's still out there." No reason, just I heard he was a bad dude.

      That's where we are with computer security. We need security, because hackers are out there, and security is important. What is security? What are hackers? I don't know, but I heard about it on the news, a man in New Hampshire had a security, and he got arrested, or someone got arrested because of what they did to his security, I don't remember. There's also identity theft, which can ruin your life somehow, I think people steal your Social Security?

      Tor is more security sauce like airport backscatter scanners are more Osama sauce.

    5. Re:Why would judges need to use TOR? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it's good enough for pedophiles, it's good enough for the US DoJ.

  10. TOR is more secure than most IT departments by JosephDoeden · · Score: 1

    Most business are hacked by hackers, not the government. They want to mitigate the risk they have, not a risk you made up to suite your own parnaioa. Until business see damages from Intelligence Agencies, it's not a point compared to hackers. Elon Musk is not protecting his networks primarily from the FBI. He is protecting it from prolific armies of Chinese hackers. China is not like the US, it's prioritizing science, technology and efficiency. To some degree their population forces those kinds of smarter solutions. The point is they have and will continue to have more coders. Asian has a lot of coders that we effectively need be American's are too lazy to get educations. Our high education rate is horrible.

    1. Re:TOR is more secure than most IT departments by raind · · Score: 0

      True but let's not forget the rest of the national actors (Amerika and her allies) Our education rate (?) Rigged like it's elections.

      --
      Get up!
  11. Those 100 judges under investigation? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    What could be more convenient than to have them funnel all their work to the FBI through Tor?

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  12. Use Tor to protect your computers by khz6955 · · Score: 1

    "The director for the Cybercrime Lab at the Department of Justice urged a roomful of 100 federal judges to use Tor to protect their computers"

    TOR will disguise the IP address of your computer. But there are a number of ways from compromised nodes to malicious dark sites that can be used to reveal your location, especially if you use the latest iteration of Microsoft Windows.

    1. Re:Use Tor to protect your computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This was probably well known when he recommended it. I am sure it was to give them a nice safety blanket while they get to watch what those judges really do, seriously does anyone really trust TOR anymore for anything important, at most it is a convenient obfuscation which at best is only good if you haven't done anything wrong enough to make it worth their while tracking you down.

  13. They are right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Posting ANON to keep from getting fired.

    Yes they CAN get into the Judicial system as if it was right there because IT IS easily accessed by them. the US government's computer network system is all thin clients of PCoIP endpoints and a few servers at key points that deliver everything the judges use as well as all the rest of the court. "turning off the computer" does nothing at all as all of it is on the servers in the datacenter hundreds of miles away.

    So the DOJ director needs to understand how his whole system is set up first before dispensing advice.

    1. Re: They are right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't believe you know what you're talking about. I've worked in IT for multiple federal agencies including the Judiciary and did not see the thin client infrastructure you are taking about at any of them.

      Also, the DOJ is not the Federal Judiciary. Two totally different branches of government. I wouldn't expect anyone at the DOJ to know much of anything about the way IT works in the Judiciary.

    2. Re:They are right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think you have been reading some serious BS somewhere, They do not use thin clients at all.

  14. 100 attack nodes for 100 judges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The FBI has notable successes sure, BUT you missed other bigger points. When Universities start looking into TOR, they find 100 automated attack nodes. Which Tor project weren't even looking for. It wasn't difficult even to find them, when Beta testers set up hidden sites they should have notice the automated attacks!

    https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/07/researchers_dis.html

    They find the directory servers are a weak spot, with Snowden revealing NSA hacking volunteers who provide directory servers, and finding it really easy to own authoritative directory servers and that servers in Rotterdam have been doing those exact same attacks:
    http://thehackernews.com/2014/12/tor-network-hacked.html

    They find the TOR exit nodes are mapped
    https://hackertarget.com/tor-exit-node-visualization/

    FFS, Shari Steele's recent hatchet job on Jacob Applebaum revealed a very 'special' attitude, you can see it in this official tweet:

    "Statement from @torproject on @ioerror.: https://t.co/ngTmKR2yCu Our community (larger than Tor) failed badly here."

    Suppose someone intimidated women using Tor. Would Tor protect free speech, that it deemed bad? Or would it undermine Tor for a larger community responsibility it views as larger than Tor?

    Doesn't that "bigger responsibility" echo the exact thing that Blackberry exec did, when he decided it was Blackberries duty to ensure bad people didn't use its encrypted messaging? Isn't this is the marketing point used to undermine free speech currently you see echo'd everywhere?

  15. Porn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They need to use TOR, because they're men and so watch porn! And of course the DOJ won't admit it, but it has access to those logs as part of its anti-terror duties.... remember it's not a search if they don't admit to looking. So they're not searching the Judges Internet logs, they're investigating hay stacks for possible needles.

    Do the DOJ is warning the judges to use TOR because... well no reason... erm.... best if you use TOR judges.... but we can't say why.....

  16. Parallel Construction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    DEA has already admitted it routinely receives spook information, it routinely covers up the source of that information with a parallel fake set of evidence.

    DEA was the lead agency against Silk Road. You claim 'IP' leaks, others have made vague 'informant' claims, but in reality none of that has been claimed or shown to a court. What was shown to the court was remarkably light on challengable information. Which is a strong indicator that it was a false Parallel Construction case:

    https://www.wired.com/2014/09/fbi-silk-road-hacking-question/

    "As bureau agent Christopher Tarbell describes it, he and another agent discovered the Silk Road’s IP address in June of 2013. According to Tarbell’s somewhat cryptic account, the two agents entered “miscellaneous” data into its login page and found that its CAPTCHA—the garbled collection of letters and numbers used to filter out spam bots—was loading from an address not connected to any Tor “node,” the computers that bounce data through the anonymity software’s network to hide its source. Instead, they say that a software misconfiguration meant the CAPTCHA data was coming directly from a data center in Iceland, the true location of the server hosting the Silk Road."

    "But that account of the discovery alone doesn’t add up, says Runa Sandvik, a privacy researcher who has closely followed the Silk Road and worked for the Tor project at the time of the FBI’s discovery. She says the Silk Road’s CAPTCHA was hosted on the same server as the rest of the Silk Road. And that would mean all of it was accessible only through Tor’s network of obfuscating bounced connections. "

    i.e. the story told to the court was a lie.

  17. TOR IS NOT TRUSTWORTHY AGAINST THE US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://motherboard.vice.com/read/how-the-nsa-or-anyone-else-can-crack-tors-anonymity

    http://www.techtimes.com/articles/167002/20160626/the-fbi-can-still-spy-on-you-even-if-youre-using-tor-and-dont-ask-why.htm

    And it's worse since those articles have been written. The FBI now owns a ton of exit nodes. Even if they can't confirm the content, they absolutely know the meta data, including which two parties are communicating.

  18. _^_^ FBI SUMMARY DO NOT TRUST ^_^_ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use Tor for sure, but you have to lock it down. Do not use ANY TAILS 1.5 or newer.

    You should also edit your torrc and add the following two lines before you ever connect.
    StrictNodes 1
    ExcludeNodes {us}

    Other codes are here.
    http://www.b3rn3d.com/blog/2014/03/05/tor-country-codes/

    Pass nothing through the US because they literally robbed the US public to spy on the US public. They think it somehow magically will increase the chances of success in their heists. As if the military and cops and home gun owners will not blast them to smithereens when the finally wake up and comprehend what useless lying cunts spies are. What is a spy? CIA. FBI. NSA. The rest? Consider them all Jewish lawyers. Load heavy.

    1. Re:_^_^ FBI SUMMARY DO NOT TRUST ^_^_ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happened in TAILS 1.5? If you always exit outside the U.S does that increase the probability by more than 50% that you are not a U.S citizen?

    2. Re:_^_^ FBI SUMMARY DO NOT TRUST ^_^_ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happened in TAILS 1.5? If you always exit outside the U.S does that increase the probability by more than 50% that you are not a U.S citizen?

      Or very much increase the odds you ARE American. Your logic's non sequitur,

    3. Re:_^_^ FBI SUMMARY DO NOT TRUST ^_^_ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Psst hey stupid fuckers.

      If they found out you are American, using your own bullshit reasoning... would they know which of the 330 million you are? If they did would they be able to decrypt your traffic and timestamps? no.

      You are some stupid fuckers.

      Stupid. Fuckers.

      That is why smart people don't use Tails 1.5 and later. Did you see Ed Snowden go down because he didn't use the latest security patches you dumb dumb ohhh fucking stupid stupid fucking bags of blood and feces mother fuckers.

  19. ==== DID I NOT TELL YOU DEBIAN IS FBI ==== by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SO IS SLASHDOT NOW.