On 22/03/2011, at 1:09 PM, Mike Perry wrote:
> You seem to have somewhat independently argued that #4 means that Tor
> cannot be trusted against (any) large government(s). This,
> unfortunately, may be true for some governments. Extremely well funded
> adversaries that are able to observe large portions of the Internet
> can probably break aspects of Tor and may be able to deanonymize
> users. This is why the core tor program currently has a version number
> of 0.2.x and comes with a warning that it is not to be used for
> "strong anonymity". (Though I personally don't believe any adversary
> can reliably deanonymize *all* tor users, for similar reasons as
> detailed here: http://archives.seul.org/or/dev/Sep-2008/msg00016.html
> but attacks on anonymity are subtle and cumulative in nature).
> I present to you this anonymously authored, non-peer reviewed
> communication to do with what you will. Should anyone actually cite
> this work in a published paper, I will ask my brethren to leave their
> garbage cans unmolested for the rest of their days.
Thanks, I think I am actually going to have to reference that.
_______________________________________________
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
