Slashdot Mirror
Group Wants To Shut Down Tor For a Day On September 1 (softpedia.com)
An anonymous reader writes: An internal group at the Tor Project is calling for a full 24-hour shutdown of the Tor network to protest the way the Tor Project dealt with the Jake Applebaum sexual misconduct accusations, and because of recent rumors it might be letting former government agents in its ranks. Two Tor members, also node operators, have shut down their servers as well, because of the same reason. They explained their motivations here and here.
"The protesters have made 16 demands," according to the article, six related to related to supposed infiltration of Tor by government agents, and 10 regarding the Appelbaum ruling and investigation -- including "asking all Tor employees that participated in this investigation to leave" and "the persons behind the JacobAppelbaum.net and the @JakeMustDie and @VictimsOfJake Twitter accounts to come forward and their identities made public."
"The protesters have made 16 demands," according to the article, six related to related to supposed infiltration of Tor by government agents, and 10 regarding the Appelbaum ruling and investigation -- including "asking all Tor employees that participated in this investigation to leave" and "the persons behind the JacobAppelbaum.net and the @JakeMustDie and @VictimsOfJake Twitter accounts to come forward and their identities made public."
If a substantial part of the Tor network is shutdown, you can bet that any one of a number of parties are going to keep a careful eye on how things come back up.
If there is a flaw in Tor, they might be able to de-anonymize users and nodes by watching them connect again for the first time.
I wouldn't put it quite that way, but I cant help but note the usual crowd banging on about "cucks" and "SJWs" or whatever the meaningless /pol/ slur of the week is yet again complaining about sexual assault being investigated.
Thankfully these people are in a minority, but good god do they like to make a noise.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Why should everyone who uses Tor to protect their anonymity be punished because of Jacob Applebaum and the people who apparently didn't respond to his misconduct appropriately?
Because by setting this controversy in front of the world, they may generate more interest and scrutiny into the matter.
The linked text points out many potential injustices and red flags, such as the hiring of two possible CIA operatives to the TOR project. It's important that all of this gets scrutinized and possibly sorted out, so that we don't end up with an insecure TOR that the CIA can eavesdrop on.
And by inconveniencing people, it might start a paradigm that people can use in future situations. Punishing someone based on accusations; ie - getting away from "innocent until proven guilty", gives enormous power to your enemies. If your opponents want to wreck you, all they have to do is gin up some accusations.
Future situations may be able to look back on this moment and think "let's wait until we have something concrete", rather than knee-jerk react in the cause of Social Justice.
Doing this is a good thing. They should turn off TOR one day a week until it's sorted out.
"the persons behind the JacobAppelbaum.net and the @JakeMustDie and @VictimsOfJake Twitter accounts to come forward and their identities made public."
Since we're talking about Tor, I can't decide whether these demands are ironic or are hypocritical.
#DeleteChrome
Seems to me like the govt has managed to destroy trust within the Tor community.
the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
Did you even read the article? These guys are trying to punish people who helped crack down on rapists. They're rapist sympathizers, which is quite the opposite of "SJWs".
I read all three articles, and it says nothing of the sort.
You're doing this site a disservice by being so intellectually dishonest.
This is Slashdot. Take your sock-puppetry elsewhere.
It sounds like these protesters need to figure out what it is they're protesting. And their demanding that an online accounts should have their "identities made public" sounds a little bit incongruous with Tor's own mission.
Shutting down Tor to protest an attack on Tor sounds like they really haven't thought this thing through, regardless of their agenda. It's not like a one-day boycott of Tor is going to cost Tor money or anything, so it's not really putting any pressure on the elements within the project that they want to force out. Plus, as other people have pointed out, it hurts Tor users more than it hurts the people they want to hurt.
Finally, the dumbness of their manifesto calls into question the validity of their claims. We don't have to worry about the government trying to destroy Tor as long as they're doing such a bang-up job all on their own.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Your projection is incredible. The only people inventing meaningless slurs are the ones that throw out shit like "neckbeard" or "pissbaby" or "fuckboy", and lynch mobs are not investigations.
Face it, rape accusations have become THE form of character assassination. It's the new "witch". There's no evidence, proving your innocence is impossible, and the mere accusation is a death sentence.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
I posted this in another post below, but I just wanted to reiterate it here, for those who might not fully understand the situation.
It might help your understanding of the situation to understand that the CIA and NSA now use fake rape and sexual assault/harassment claims as their preferred method of character assassination (much easier, less messy, and just as effective as actual assassination). It happened to the poor bastard IMF head who made the VERY stupid mistake of challenging the supremacy of the U.S. Dollar. It also happened to Julian Assange and others.
No tin-foil hats here. It's just their modern way of doing business. So any time you hear of sex crimes charges against any member of the hacker/security community (or anyone else the NSA or CIA might have a vested interest in silencing or ostracizing), you should be VERY, VERY skeptical of the charges (and take a long hard look at the accusers).
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
First off, read the Tor stinks document. This outlines how the NSA and GCHQ intended to attack Tor:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/oct/04/tor-stinks-nsa-presentation-document
Keep in mind this document was 2007, so all of that was already done a long time ago. In particular note they intended to add many more of their own nodes and shape the traffic to ensure they could force a routing.
All the attacks, ONIONBREATH attack on hidden servers, increasing the Tor nodes they control (NEWTONCRADLE) etc. all will already be done, and many more besides, this document is very old.
Tor Foundation did not discover or even look for those attack nodes, or any of the GCHQ run nodes, when Snowden leaks came out. It was an outside university that went looking for attack nodes and found 100 of them.
Next off, read the JTRIG document. Domestic propaganda, fake victim posts, poll rigging software, HTTPS man in the middle software, astroturf.
https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/
See the slide "Discredit a target"
"Set up Honey Trap" "Write a blog purporting to be one of their victims" "Email / text their friends/ colleges etc."
Do not use TOR. The software and foundation that wrote it are backdoored.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/edward-snowden-revelations-gchq-using-online-viruses-and-honey-traps-to-discredit-targets-9117683.html
"Britain’s GCHQ has a covert unit which uses dirty tricks from “honey trap” sexual liaisons to texting anonymous messages to friends and neighbours to discredit targets from hackers to governments, according to the latest leaks from whistleblower Edward Snowden."
"The covert GCHQ unit - the Joint Intelligence Threat Research Group (JTRIG) - runs what it terms an “Effects” programme against Britain’s enemies under what it calls the four Ds: “Deny/ Disrupt/ Degrade/ Deceive.” The mission of the unit is: “Using online techniques to make something happen in the real or cyber world.”
"Slides from a 2012 presentation, marked Top Secret, outline JTRIG’s role in discrediting targets using both online techniques, such as using blogs to leak confidential information to companies or journalists, and “real life” methods like the honey trap - a time-honoured intelligence trick of luring an individual into a sexual encounter to gain information and leverage, potentially for blackmail."
Jacob has been a target frequently, he's an effective speaker:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vILAlhwUgIU
It's not really a surprise he's a target. It's more, business as usual.
It's not clear that the allegations against Assange are false. (It's not clear that they are true either.) What is clear is that Assange being pursued by Swedish authorities is purely political and that hey does have a legitimate fear of his extradition to the US should he face these allegations in Sweden - because Swedish authorities have an abysmal track record when it comes to handling sexual assault cases. That does not mean, however, that he didn't do it. You can be guilty of sexual assault _and_ be persecuted by the US government at the same time. (Also, obviously it doesn't mean he did do it, that's what a proper investigation would be for. I just don't have faith that in this case there is going to be an impartial one in either direction.)
So please stop claiming that the allegations against Assange are false - you simply don't know that (and probably never will). They are as of yet unproven and you can make your point about Assange being targeted even if they happen to be true. (Because even if true the Swedish authorities would usually not have prosecuted him.)
In re Applebaum I don't think there are any winners here. The website about him was just really ugly (in contrast to many other people here I don't hold the opinion that alleged sexual assault victims have to go to the police or shut up, because I know how problematic it can be to report to the police, and I do think it can be fair in coming forward to the press, but there's a way of doing that and this website isn't it), and people calling for his death via Twitter is beyond the pale. (Anyone uttering death threats has immediately disqualified themselves from any conversation.) On the other hand, a _lot_ of people that knew him thought he was capable of doing this (and not all of them are going to be infiltrators), so even if he turns out to be completely innocent (which is still not clear yet, only some allegations have been proven to be false, in others the jury is still out), he still doesn't come out as the hero of this story.
I wouldn't put it quite that way, but I cant help but note the usual crowd banging on about "cucks" and "SJWs" or whatever the meaningless /pol/ slur of the week is yet again complaining about sexual assault being investigated.
If anything, they're complaining that the police didn't investigate--because they were never called--yet headlines were written as if there'd been a trial with a guilty verdict.
Are you really surprised that the "crowd" complains when they see potentially life-ruining sexual assault allegations handed over to a private company hired by Tor to do a secret investigation, instead of the justice system?
Stop the Bullshit.
We need tor. Tor needs developers. Tor needs developers, which work together.
The best case for any agency is when the developers distrust each other and work against each other.
Whatever Appelbaum did or did not do, it's not in our interest, that this stops the work for tor.
Read this: https://cryptome.org/2012/07/g...
Really read this. This list contains some of the things you're seeing here. How to disturb groups and prevent them from working efficicently, how to get them to fight each other instead of fighting their enemy.
Keep your personal conflicts personal and continue to work against the threats we're facing.
I followed the story and read the accounts of the accusers back when the news broke. The modus operandi (sending acolytes to pressure someone) is exactly what Applebaum did.
The major point of the accusers wasn't that Applebaum raped someone. The major thing was that he was being such a giant asshole to some (many) individuals, bullying and pressuring them, that it crossed into abuse. And he mostly did that in front of witnesses. So people knew. All the website did was assemble a list and also show that those that were abused suffered a lot as a result.
It mainly served to wake up the people that witnessed a lot of the abuse (those working with him in Berlin) and force them into action.
If you knew anything about abuse, then you know very well that there is a huge grey area inside relationships (both as friends, partners and families) that do not fit neatly into the criminal law, but that could still greatly hurt the victims of such abuse.
Appelbaum sounds like an epic asshole, the 'victims' like naive retards and if this wasn't orchestrated by the feds.. Melrose Place drama.
Being a social asshole, no matter how severe, does NOT give you the right to retaliate with FALSE RAPE CHARGES.
Yes, if you run a tor node and you don't want to keep it up, take it down. You should be removed from the tor network.
The same goes for root DNS server or TLD server operators. If you don't want to keep it up, take it down. It will be removed from the network.
Being a part of something doesn't mean you provide a service and if you're unable or unwilling to do so reliably then you'll be removed. If you thought this was your method of expressing your political thoughts you were wrong.
Jacob Applebaum may have done bad things, but he certainly didn't take down the tor network for a day. These self-absorbed aholes are much much worse than anything he did because they want to impact millions of people in thousands of countries so they can have their sick moment of SJW fantasy.
Sorry. If you can't run a server without wanting to keep it up, you should be removed from the network.
The Internet views censorship as damage and routes around it -- famous saying which applies ever more to this.
E
Isn't it supposed to be innocent until proven guilty? What if you were a juror? Would you suddenly find him guilty due to mere allegations without the evidence? Sexual assault is a serious crime that comes with a heavy stigma just for being accused of doing it. Do you really feel comfortable demonizing someone based on "he said, she said" statements? Everyone involved needs to be looked at with a microscope, not just the person being accused.
It's not tinfoil hattery to think the government will use any means necessary to discredit someone. Does it apply here? Who knows, but it's not that far-fetched of an idea.
Assange committed a "crime" that isn't a crime in the US. He lied to a woman to convince her to have sex with him. Apparently that's "rape" in Sweden, and not in the US. In addition to the non-crime (from an American perspective, assuming you are American), If the US media weren't a bunch of liars, it'd have been called "sexual misconduct" or the like, rather than "rape". It's not rape in any definition I've ever seen. To call it such, even if he's guilty is an insult to women who have been raped.
Learn to love Alaska
> innocent until proven guilty
Well, except for the part where your name and face are published over all forms of media with giant captions like 'RAPIST?'... sorta ruins vast portions of your life if you are innocent. So yeah... innocent, but a pariah to everyone except the greatest of friends and family.
Applebaum was not let go over false rape charges, but over a long history of abuse of multiple people. Rape may or may have been part of his conduct.
is that the TOR network is so badly designed it apparently can be switched off entirely by a central authority.
Your projection is incredible. The only people inventing meaningless slurs are the ones that throw out shit like "neckbeard" or "pissbaby" or "fuckboy", and lynch mobs are not investigations.
Lucky we aren't talking about a lynch mob then. We are talking about people wanting to distance themselves from a disturbed individual. Nothing more, nothing less. That's how the world works.
And how are your slurs relevant here? Never heard pissbaby nor fuckboy before, did you just make them up? Those that spout SJW (which is anybody that thinks women have any right to anything judging the idiots using the word here and elsewhere) and try to portrait men who doesn't like sexual misconduct or even (gasp!) rape as weak, effeminate or "cucks" that are just fishing for pitty-sex. The reality is that mature, confident men with a normal sex-life (whatever their sexuality) doesn't like sexual misconduct nor rape.
But you and your ilk will never be mature, right?
Some years ago I thought the characterization of many men as not only thinking women as weaker, less worth than men but even secretly hating women was bullshit. Thanks to you and your ilk I now realize that this is true and that many in the technical field hold those views.
Face it, rape accusations have become THE form of character assassination. It's the new "witch". There's no evidence, proving your innocence is impossible, and the mere accusation is a death sentence.
No evidence? Several persons, male and female, have described in detail how this individual acts. That's evidence. It would be evidence in a court of law and it is evidence outside it.
It's obvious you and your ilk defines evidence as "anything I agree with" and not as the rest of the world does. And that factor repeats - you and your ilk doesn't know how the world works but don't like anything that goes against your fucked-up concept world.
My ears are still open for a more accurate term.
That's missing the point. Instead of labelling, respond to the questions put and rebut the arguments made.
What about rape cultures? You have no problem with presuming every time an assigned male starts conversation with a womyn-born-womyn that he's trying to rape her?
That's not what rape culture is. I can explain it if you like, but it's probably easier if you just read the Wikipedia article about. Pay careful attention to the "Effects on Men" section. Rape culture theory holds that all men are NOT rapists, the exact opposite in fact, and that the stereotypes which pressure men to behave like that are part of what is called "toxic masculinity".
It's literally the exact opposite of what you think.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Medicine interferes with the natural experience of dying from dysentry or infected papercuts. Clothes interfere with the natural experience of freezing, and food production with the natural experience of starving. Houses interfere with the natural experience of waking to a bear gnawing at your feet. Naturalistic fallacy is a fallacy because nature is a murderous bitch.
You and people like you are welcome to make each other's lives short, vicious and brutal up while trying to earn your Darwin awards, but I for one am damn glad a Leviathan stands ready to squeeze you like a bug if you try that crap with me. Which, come to think of it, should fit your own worldview perfectly well, unless of course it's yourself you see as the 500-pound gorilla ruling the jungle.
Honestly, I've read some dumb shit on this site before, but you just made the new record. Congratulations.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Assange committed a "crime" that isn't a crime in the US. He lied to a woman to convince her to have sex with him. Apparently that's "rape" in Sweden, and not in the US.
Nope, that's a lie. He had sex with an unconscious woman, knowing that before she fell asleep, she told him 'no'. And not only is that a crime in Sweden, it's also a crime in the US. And it's also a crime in the UK, where Assange tried exactly the defense you're offering: he said that because she didn't fight him off later, it shouldn't be a crime. The UK High Court, in its opinion upholding extradition, stated:
Our view is, as we have set out, that a jury would be entitled to find that consent to sexual intercourse with a condom is not consent to sexual intercourse without a condom which affords protection. As the conduct set out in the EAW alleges that Mr Assange knew SW would only have sex if a condom was used, the allegation that he had sexual intercourse with her without a condom would amount to an allegation of rape in England and Wales.
As the EAW sets out the circumstance that SW was asleep, s.75 which applies to rape is also material: [quote of statute removed].
As it is alleged SW was asleep, then she is not to be taken not to have consented to sexual intercourse.
What is clear is that Assange being pursued by Swedish authorities is purely political and that hey does have a legitimate fear of his extradition to the US should he face these allegations in Sweden
The giant gaping hole in this conspiracy theory is Assange was in the UK before he fled to the Ecuadoran embassy. The UK being one of the US's closest allies, and who have cooperated many, many, many, many times on clandestine matters and criminal matters.
If the US wanted Assange so badly, the UK would have happily arrested him and sent him to the US with a bow stuck to his head.
What is your solution? Don't allow people to make rape allegations? I don't think that is either fair or possible.
It's telling that you truly can't tell the difference between not completely unpersoning someone because of anonymous smears that even the alleged victim has publicly (and non-anonymously) rebuked as being complete horseshit, with the people portrayed as heroes and saviors actually being pretty shitty to her, and not allowing anyone to make rape allegations.
In situations like this the only way forward is to investigate. Applelbaum hasn't even bothered to deny any specific allegations, or make any kind of defence really. I'm sorry, but all we can do is evaluate the claims on the evidence we have. Multiple, corroborating stories that can be linked to specific times and places where he made public appearances with the victims.
If I made an anonymous webpage accusing you of everything from jaywalking to pedophilia and raised up a lynch mob to ostracize and unperson you would you exhaustively deny and refute everything or simply turn away in utter disgust?
This isn't evidence. NOTHING about this is evidence. These aren't "multiple corroborating stories", they're anonymous smears with absolutely no evidence that have already been completely rejected by the woman they're about. It's trivially easy to simply make up multiple stories with a handful of real details. If I knew you in real life I could do it in a single afternoon. Would that make it true? No, it wouldn't, EVIDENCE would make it true. Anonymous accusations are not evidence.
Say it with me again: Accusations are not evidence. Accusations NEED evidence.
That's the fundamental problem with your ideology, you treat accusations AS evidence and thus always reach a guilty verdict even when the woman those accusations are made on behalf of personally and publicly rebukes the entire thing as being total horseshit.
Which is, by the way, the only evidence we have so far: The woman who was supposedly the victim in all of this has completely denied the entire thing, told the real story of what happened to her, and even pointed out that the people supposedly "protecting" her were behaving shitty towards her and trying to force her into a role of agency-less victimhood.
As for slurs, why don't you start by not ever calling anyone an "SJW" again? Take the high ground.
First people demanded that nobody refer to that ideology and its adherents as feminists. So the term SJW was invented. Now you demand nobody use the term "SJW" and act as if it were a slur like neckbeard, fuckboy, pissbaby, and all the other identity-based slurs invented by SJWs. If another new term were invented you would demand nobody use that either.
What you're doing is nothing more than attempting to stifle dissent by making it impossible to even name or discuss your ideology and in-group. It's the exact same as if the GOP were to claim everyone using the words "neoliberal economics" or "trickle down economics" were terrorists.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."