Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The New York Times Launches Tor Onion Service To Overcome Censorship, Ensure Privacy (betanews.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the you-gotta-do-what-you-gotta-do dept.

Mark Wilson quotes a report from BetaNews: The New York Times has announced that it is launching a Tor Onion Service version of its website. The new, more secure way to access the site will open it up to people around the world whose internet connections are blocked or monitored. It also caters to a growing breed of people who are concerned about what their web browsing habit might reveal and who have turned to Tor to protect their privacy. The new service is described as "experimental and under development," and some features of the website -- such as the ability to comment -- do not work. The NYT warns that fine-tuning of performance and features may mean there are periods of downtime, but the long-term aim is to completely replicate the main website as an Onion Service.

69 comments

  1. Inception? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The Onion Router Onion Service?

    1. Re:Inception? by PPH · · Score: 1

      Shades of Being John Malkovich.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re: Inception? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Daily Stormer did it better

    3. Re:Inception? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

      The New York Times launches Tor Onion service to overcome censorship, ensure privacy.

      The Onion launches New York Tor Pretzel service to overcome hunger, snack envy.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    4. Re:Inception? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being John Malkovich was funny. This is just sad.

    5. Re:Inception? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not an acronym: https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq.html.en#WhyCalledTor

  2. Sad Failing New York Times by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 0

    Why do they hate America and Freedom so much?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re: Sad Failing New York Times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because dissidents in oppressive regimes could never oppose dictators without access to the critical information provided by the NYT.

    2. Re: Sad Failing New York Times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CIA*

    3. Re:Sad Failing New York Times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NYT? Not this TOR_issue .. read the articles; might be 1955 again ... something before the drooling, Rawlsian nibberizing started. Hi-Fi writing skills ; it's a pleasure to read authors paragraphs. You can read eh hoser? Kinda like the old NEW-YORKER, but not so gaffy.

    4. Re: Sad Failing New York Times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually kind of hilarious given that they've been publishling ghost-written Iranian propaganda and been the lead apologists for the Chinese government.

    5. Re: Sad Failing New York Times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The oppressed dissidents of North Korea would have no hope for freedom if they could not access American Pravda via Tor. Imagine, what would those North Koreans do without the Times to tell them how great socialism is!

      Sarcasm aside, three cheers for James OKeefe, the greatest journalist of our generation who is destroying these state regime rags like the Times.

    6. Re:Sad Failing New York Times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good for countries that censor fake new like the New York Times. Trump haters and media trolls need to be censored.

    7. Re: Sad Failing New York Times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the contrary - NYT can be accessed via any Tor connection now, without having to egress an exit node. Our reach increases.

    8. Re:Sad Failing New York Times by KingBenny · · Score: 1

      you say those two words in one line as if you actually mean it ?
      do you want me to sum some up ? meddling in ... meddling in ... assassination, meddling .... "the united lobbies of the leaders of the free world" (self-proclaimed) ... meddling in ... and maybe some, oowh, euhm, meddling in ... .creating al qaeda in afghanistan in the name of what about zee russians ... creating IS in iraq while trying to neutralize the zone ... now competing with the russians to bomb them the flattest first in Syria ... and then maybe some euh ... meddling ,and euih ... meddling and maybe telling everyone what to do and ... o yea george washington invented democracy and euh ... i dont know maybe some euh ... meddling ? perhaps like as if you own the place and your name was Edison, the original copyright troll
      don't get me wrong, i met some nice Americans with an actual realistic non narcist view on the world but if you want me to give one trait that's unique to american culture i always say : american narcissism ... freedom huh ?
      CIA ? nicaragua ? medellin ... war on drugs, commercial penal system ... bi-partisan particracy in the name of baby jesus and democracy ...
      i'm sure theres a few in your what ... 400 million overthere who see things like that
      don't blame me for it
      i just thought it was funny, the days of the wild west are long gone man, you are free to do as they beat you with a stick and that's it

      --
      Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
  3. desperate Times by turkeydance · · Score: 1, Funny

    for the NY Times. this looks like an Onion headline.

  4. Tits for everyone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    nt

    1. Re:Tits for everyone! by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      What do you mean? An african or european tits?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:Tits for everyone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes!

  5. TheOnion by igny · · Score: 5, Funny

    I understand NY Times' desire to compete with TheOnion for delivery of satirical news, but enough is enough, TheOnion must sue NY Times for trademark violation here.

    --
    In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
  6. TOR is not anonymizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obfuscationizing isn't a thing

    1. Re:TOR is not anonymizing by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

      Really? I'm pretty sure you just did it to whatever word you were trying to write.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  7. Uhm... by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

    Bitcoin paywall, presumably?

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  8. Pay wall? by bsDaemon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do they still paywall the stories? Do they allow you to log in? (Thus helping to deanonymize you on other onion sites)?

    If they're giving easy text versions of stories, free from paywall, without the annoyance of comments (meta comment bashing comment...) then it may be worthwhile. Otherwise, like FB over Tor they are probably just going to do more harm than good

    1. Re:Pay wall? by CaptainDork · · Score: 2, Funny

      I never meta comment I didn't like.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    2. Re:Pay wall? by ortholattice · · Score: 1

      I am curious: what is the issue with FB over Tor? (I don't have a Facebook account so I can't try it.)

    3. Re: Pay wall? by bsDaemon · · Score: 2

      You have to log in, it uses javascript, etc. so they would be able to a) fingerprint you and b) tie you to a (presumably) real identity. It seems to defeat the whole purpose and creates an OPSEC breach for anyone dumb enough to do it

    4. Re:Pay wall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ONLY Democracy can Democratize Democrat Democratizations, not LUDDITE TOR!

      Democracy!

    5. Re:Pay wall? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Yeah... let the real APPS guy do it, you're just embarrassing yourself.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    6. Re: Pay wall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Who is "they"? A 3rd party other than Facebook? This is far harder with a onion site than using Tor with an exit node to access a normal site. The reason being that while it's "easy" for a large entity to cover nearly all entry and exit nodes, they can't do the same for onion sites because they don't use exit nodes.

      Facebook will of course identify you but who cares, that's the whole point of Facebook.

    7. Re:Pay wall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never meta comment I didn't like.

      I never níggerdicked your mother more than she liked. I don't think that's possible. Her vagina is just plain cavernous. You weren't born, not really. You fell out.

    8. Re: Pay wall? by Obfuscant · · Score: 2

      It seems to defeat the whole purpose

      There are two purposes for Tor. One is to prevent third parties from tracing you by monitoring your traffic. That is unchanged.

      But another purpose is to prevent the SECOND party (FB, or NYT in this case) from tracing you, which having to log in completely defeats.

      I don't know, so I'm asking. Is there a javascript function that could appear on a web page served via Tor from NYT or FB that would cause the browser to reach out to another website directly (not via Tor) and disclose the user's actual source IP address? Something like the one pixel images used to track users reading an email. Does the system of the Tor user force all IP traffic through Tor no matter what destination, or can stuff slip out the side, so to speak?

    9. Re: Pay wall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only safe way to use Tor is via Tor Browser. Do not try to configure Tor yourself. Only use Tor Browser. And know that ONLY the browserâ(TM)s traffic gets sent over Tor; all your other internet traffic will go through your normal internet connection.

      Even with Tor Browser, there could always be zero day exploits or bugs, but overall it is very secure, especially if you set it to the highest security setting. However, remember that there is no such thing as perfect security. There are always unknown bugs in software and risk-reward trade offs in the security procedures you choose to follow.

      There can be other risks using Tor, also, that can hurt you if you are not aware of them. For example, if the website you are accessing is not HTTPS encrypted, the last node in your Tor circuit can potentially see your traffic. That means if you fill out forms or provide other personal information, the exit node operator (who may be malicious) can intercept it. They can also maliciously redirect you to a different website than you intended.

      The vast majority of people probably should not use Tor. The people who really need it are journalists and sources working on sensitive stories, people in censored countries, security researchers, private investigators, domestic violence victims, etc.

      If you are an everyday user who cares about your privacy, a business person, a traveler, use public wifi, torrent or stream content, or anything like that, then just get a good no-log commercial VPN (check reviews, find one with a great reputation and a proven track record), use Firefox or Chromium (NOT Chrome) as your browser with ad/tracker blockers and HTTPS Everywhere (or use Brave), and use StartPage or DuckDuckGo as your search engine. That is enough to protect most people from corporate and mass government surveillance of their web browsing.

    10. Re: Pay wall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to add JS blocking to your list. That alone will eliminate 90% of the exploits out there.
      Whitelisting the sites you frequently visit will ensure smooth experience.

    11. Re: Pay wall? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      There are two purposes for Tor. One is to prevent third parties from tracing you by monitoring your traffic. That is unchanged.

      But another purpose is to prevent the SECOND party (FB, or NYT in this case) from tracing you, which having to log in completely defeats.

      I don't know, so I'm asking. Is there a javascript function that could appear on a web page served via Tor from NYT or FB that would cause the browser to reach out to another website directly (not via Tor) and disclose the user's actual source IP address? Something like the one pixel images used to track users reading an email. Does the system of the Tor user force all IP traffic through Tor no matter what destination, or can stuff slip out the side, so to speak?

      Technically, the Tor browser prohibits such access for obvious reasons.

      But having Tor block others from observing your traffic is often Good Enough - they don't care for the anonymity Tor can provide. Indeed, perhaps there's a chance you want the former but not the latter - let's say you come across a bunch of "interesting" documents. You want the former to prevent people from seeing what you did, but you want the latter to validate that you were the source and by reputation either a source for made up crap, or a source for authentic information people would rather kept hidden.

      Facebook and the NYT believe some people really do not want others to know what articles they read or what they post about. Perhaps you're homosexual in a country where homosexuals are put to death - it would certainly be nicer to read those kinds of articles off of Tor.

    12. Re:Pay wall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +"Do they still paywall the stories?"

      They never did. They just forced you to delete the NYT cookie each time after reading 5 articles.

    13. Re: Pay wall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know, so I'm asking. Is there a javascript function that could appear on a web page served via Tor from NYT or FB that would cause the browser to reach out to another website directly (not via Tor) and disclose the user's actual source IP address? Something like the one pixel images used to track users reading an email. Does the system of the Tor user force all IP traffic through Tor no matter what destination, or can stuff slip out the side, so to speak?

      There has been a quiet battle going on as to whether JavaScript should be enabled with Tor or not.

      Proponents on the side of keeping JavaScript 'on' include members of the Tor community itself.
      The argument is that 'all Tor users should look the same and blend in with other inet users'.
      Also that
      The slider available with the Tor browser is then used to vary the privacy of your interaction with the inet.

      Proponents on the side of keeping JavaScript 'off'' often site (no pun intended) that JaavScipt allows unfettered access to various parts of the browser, via its API's, upto the ability to employ more sophisticated tracking techniques. The belief is, if JavaScript is not allowed to run in the first place, then problem solved.

      The first camp is right I think in trying to keep all users blended in as much as possible with the general population. Plugins such as NoScript can then help prevent too much leakage via JavaScript.

      The second have a good point too. If no JavaScript is run, then you are in a 'prevention is better than cure' scenario.

      I'm not taking sides. Every time I look at the latest thoughts on this I still cannot make up my mind.

    14. Re:Pay wall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they aren't doing it so you can hide who you are from *them* but rather from all the connections and servers and routers between user and site... although with all the third party bullshit loaded on their pages, a dozen other companies will also know. nice idea, bad implementation.

    15. Re: Pay wall? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      I don't know, so I'm asking. Is there a javascript function that could appear on a web page served via Tor from NYT or FB that would cause the browser to reach out to another website directly (not via Tor) and disclose the user's actual source IP address? Something like the one pixel images used to track users reading an email. Does the system of the Tor user force all IP traffic through Tor no matter what destination, or can stuff slip out the side, so to speak?

      No, in theory Javascript can't do anything really nasty as all traffic is routed through TOR, whether it's onion sites or via exit nodes to the normal web. They can fingerprint your browser much better to recognize return visits and possibly track you across sites, which may be a risk if you're doing identifying activities some of the time. But you have exploits such as these, they all involve breaking the security model but most of them involve Javascript. While in theory there can be bugs in any part of the code the HTML rendering, image decoding etc. are much more static, heavily tested, fuzzed and sometimes formally proven so they extremely rarely lead to remote exploits on their own. Usually they need some form of scripting engine to orchestrate the triggering so it'll point to a malicious payload, otherwise it's usually just a crash/hang bug.

      If you want to get more paranoid than that, you run the browser from its own VM that doesn't have any other firewall access than through TOR. That way even if you have an exploit for the browser all you have is the data the VM holds, obviously then you should not do anything personally identifying inside that VM. If you're even more worried than that and think they might try to break out of the VM too you do the same thing physically using a two NIC computer as your TOR gateway with all other ports closed. There are specialized Linux distros like Tails, Whonix etc. that do most of the heavy lifting for you. From what I understand most people fail at much more basic things though, they use the same nicks and passwords, reveal personal info etc. linking them to real world identities, they download media files, PDFs and open them in non-TOR applications that call out to the normal web and so on.

      Encouraging people to do "normal" browsing like NYT and Facebook through TOR might be a good thing if they're not going all-out on security, as it's free and probably even better than a VPN for browsing. At least as long as you don't type anything important into non-https sites, since TOR gives exit nodes a free man-in-the-middle attack by design. But if you're Snowden or have some other truly deep secrets then this "casual" TOR use will likely get in the way of proper OPSEC and compartmentalization. Then again, you could always compartmentalize the compartments and have a casual TorBrowser and a paranoid TorBrowser inside a VM. The most important part though is that it's not a magic bullet, TOR will protect one angle of attack. There are many others and a double-bolted reinforce steel door is no good next to an open window...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    16. Re: Pay wall? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Anonyminity is only one function of Tor. It has a second function too: Censorship evasion. Plenty of people around the world really don't mind Facebook knowing who they are - they just want to hide from their government, to make sure they are not arrested for sedition or blasphemy, or access news and material their government has deemed too dangerous to permit the people to see. In that event, Tor does the job very well.

    17. Re: Pay wall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Creimer go home, you are drunk on protein bars again.

    18. Re: Pay wall? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Plenty of people around the world really don't mind Facebook knowing who they are - they just want to hide from their government,

      Facebook, as a corporation, is a creation of the government, and the government has methods of getting information from them. In the US, that's a warrant. In other countries, that may be less strenuous on the government. It may be under the table, via hacking, for example.

      Facebook exists to make a profit off of the individual's information, and so may wind up selling it to that government, even indirectly. It is much safer for those who are scared of their government's knowledge of their access to a corporate resource to do so completely anonymously, which means no login to Facebook or NYT.

      In that event, Tor does the job very well.

      Tor has not once prevented Facebook from taking advantage of the one true product they have: the user. And they won't stop NYT from doing that, either. Tor does one job it can, but not the only job necessary.

  9. Anyone even slightly left of center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Needs to take precautions in the era of Donald J. Trump.

    He hates canabis and the DEA is going to kick in your door and shoot your dog.

    Marijuana is ***NOT*** in the Bible, so Jeff Sessions will make sure you're grow is raided.

    Peace.

    1. Re:Anyone even slightly left of center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Needs to take precautions in the era of Donald J. Trump.

      He hates canabis and the DEA is going to kick in your door and shoot your dog.

      Marijuana is ***NOT*** in the Bible, so Jeff Sessions will make sure you're grow is raided.

      Peace.

      Sad thing these clowns are gonna get elected again cuz right wingers vote and lefties don't.

      Don't come on here complaining when Trump/Sessions get reelected when you said you don't vote because you're an anarchist or whatever superior person you are and don't believe in voting.

    2. Re:Anyone even slightly left of center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're just butthurt that the wall is going to destroy the drug smuggling industry and drive up prices for you.

    3. Re: Anyone even slightly left of center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Colorado and Washington have American cannabis farms. Like it or not, cannabis is a legitimate industry. If you're against drugs, I suggest you stop drinking alcohol and caffeine, and stop taking prescription medicine.

    4. Re: Anyone even slightly left of center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine what the price of gas would do if we suddenly couldn't import oil. That's what the border wall will do to the price of weed.

    5. Re: Anyone even slightly left of center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your retarded little wall will have even less effect on weed prices than it will on immigration. And that's even if it ever actually gets built (it won't).

    6. Re:Anyone even slightly left of center by sheramil · · Score: 2

      Marijuana is ***NOT*** in the Bible,

      Bitch, please. First book of Genesis:

      001:029 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

    7. Re: Anyone even slightly left of center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because we all know that there was no federal drug war under Obama or Clinton, right? Stop being a tool. Both major parties are corrupt.

    8. Re:Anyone even slightly left of center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm an anarchist who voted FOR Trump rather than staying home. Trump is dangerous in the short term. What the Democrats tried to pull is MUCH more dangerous in the long term (basically removing the popular voice from the political parties in favor of selection based on donor wishes).

  10. And things just got interesting by Snotnose · · Score: 1

    this will be fun to watch.

  11. i am anarchist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I refuse 2 vote

  12. Yeeeeaaaahhhhhh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll buy that for a dollar cause TNY is really, really trustworthy.

  13. I'm a single-issue voter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    **All** I care about is if a politician supports marijuana.

    **I** grow marijuana. Lots of marijuana. I smoke marijuana. I sell marijuana.

    Please tell me why I should vote for **** -->> any -- *** Republican ***.

    The Republicans want to arrest me and imprison me for life. For growing and smoking a plant that **millions** of people enjoy. Their *** CHURCH *** says I'm a bad person.

    *************** Come to my place motherfuckers ****************.

    You'll be met by a barrage of MK19 HE rounds, M60s, AK47s, booby traps, shotguns and ultimately your death.

    1. Re:I'm a single-issue voter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Please tell me why I should vote for **** -->> any -- *** Republican ***....You'll be met by a barrage of MK19 HE rounds, M60s, AK47s, booby traps, shotguns and ultimately your death.

      Off the top of my head, because democrats would throw you in jail for ten years for owning any single item on that list?

      Anyway, if your entire life revolves around weed I doubt you're the type to stumble your way down to the polling station in the first place.

    2. Re:I'm a single-issue voter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'll be met by a barrage of MK19 HE rounds, M60s, AK47s, booby traps, shotguns

      You neither own nor have ever been in the same room as any of those things.

  14. This make no sense by AnthonywC · · Score: -1, Troll

    Why would anyone use TOR to read fake NYT MSM crap?

    1. Re:This make no sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the Guardian doesn't have a .onion site?

    2. Re:This make no sense by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      The reason makes no difference.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    3. Re:This make no sense by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Onion Service will be the next version of the www.
      As less of the internet gets searched by political "search engines" having results altered, people will move to onion service to rediscover the joys of the net in the mid 1990's.
      The more social media removes movie reviews, links, comments, the more people will seek fun and freedom again.
      Freedom of speech, freedom after speech. Its like making a 1990's web site early in the next be tech change.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  15. NYTimes is the reason why Clinton lost... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    NYT is a shitty propaganda outlet that in large part contributed to Clinton's loss in the election. If you went to NYT within the months of the election, you would've been greeted by an obnoxious ticker on top of the front page that displayed Clinton's chances of victory against Trump. At some point, it showed over 90% chance of Hildawg winning. The intent of the paper, which abandoned any pretenses of unbiased and independent journalism by publicly announcing their support for Clinton, was to demoralize Trump voters into staying home on election day by consistently emphasizing that Trump had no chance of winning. This was part of an organized campaign against Trump and had participants in the likes of WaPo, CNN, BBC, etc.. However, their whole plan backfired. Instead of demoralizing Trump voters, they made Clinton voters so overconfident that they didn't bother showing up to vote.

    Nowadays, NYT spends all its resources trying to deflect blame by fabricating stories of Hackerman Putin. Indeed, it's all you ever really see on their front page anymore. The moderated comment sections of their articles has turned to echo chambers as the moderators ban anyone that disagrees with the nonsense they're peddling.

    The amount of damage NYT caused to its own reputation was immense enough that they had to resort to begging for paid subscriptions to their shitty site to fund their propagandists.

  16. Not censored by jez9999 · · Score: 1

    This is the same Tor whose team had such strong free speech principles they said they would change it to make it hard to access The Daily Stormer. The New York Times isn't censored on the regular internet, they're so pro-establishment. Nobody needs it as an Onion site.

    --
    == Jez ==
    Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
    1. Re:Not censored by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      This is the same Tor whose team had such strong free speech principles they said they would change it to make it hard to access The Daily Stormer.

      Pics or it didn't happen. The only comment I found was this:

      We are disgusted, angered, and appalled by everything these racists stand for and do. We feel this way any time the Tor network and software are used for vile purposes. But we can't build free and open source tools that protect journalists, human rights activists, and ordinary people around the world if we also control who uses those tools. Tor is designed to defend human rights and privacy by preventing anyone from censoring things, even us.

      https://blog.torproject.org/to...

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    2. Re:Not censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This was proposed on their GitHub but denied.

  17. We need all news and wikipedia on onion sites by Nocturrne · · Score: 1

    As much as I hate the NYT's propaganda, I would be very happy to see more news and information available to those who live under the criminal leadership in countries like China, Russia, and Iran. Old VPN technologies are easy to block or identify with deep packet inspection - it's not cheap to do so, but corrupt countries like China and the US have virtually unlimited resources for manipulating the internet. We need a new internet.

    1. Re:We need all news and wikipedia on onion sites by Kernel+Krumpit · · Score: 1

      +1 "We need a new internet"

      --
      May the lies we live by make us strong, healthy, happy and wise - Kurt Vonnegut.
  18. JEWS ON TOR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... that aren't necessarily Mossad. They are sneaking in with media "protections". This is weak. Pay close attention.

  19. login and timing attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are clearly working on deanonimization of tor users.