To my knowledge, TOR could easily be subverted. If you attack all your known exit nodes, you can force your own nodes to have a higher priority due to the relativity low traffic compared to those under attack. You could then tag unencrypted packets and follow them back to the initiating computer.
This scenario was proposed to me when I first started using TOR, and I was under the impression that Anonymous had done something similar when they exposed a number of illegal websites On Jul 17, 2014 7:28 PM, "Stephen Crane" <culda.ri...@gmail.com> wrote: > Tor was originally sponsored by the US Naval Research Lab. Does this > automatically mean it's backdoored then? Could someone insert a backdoor > into open-source software? Yes. Funding sources do little to change this. > Now, who is controlling exit nodes is a different story, but that's another > can of worms. > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Ivan .Heca <ivan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Funding doubled, so engineering some back doors? > > > > In 2012, Tor nearly doubled its budget, taking in $2.2 million from > > Pentagon and intel-connected grants: $876,099 came from the DoD, $353,000 > > from the State Department, $387,800 from IBB. > > > > That same year, Tor lined up an unknown amount funding from the > > Broadcasting Board of Governors to finance fast exit nodes. > > > > http://pando.com/2014/07/16/tor-spooks/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sent through the Full Disclosure mailing list > > http://nmap.org/mailman/listinfo/fulldisclosure > > Web Archives & RSS: http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sent through the Full Disclosure mailing list > http://nmap.org/mailman/listinfo/fulldisclosure > Web Archives & RSS: http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/ > _______________________________________________ Sent through the Full Disclosure mailing list http://nmap.org/mailman/listinfo/fulldisclosure Web Archives & RSS: http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/
