[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[cryptography] To Tor or not to Tor?

To: John Young <[email protected]>
Subject: [cryptography] To Tor or not to Tor?
From: [email protected] (coderman)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 17:05:58 -0700
Cc: cpunks <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Discussion of cryptography and related <[email protected]>
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <3735791.WCR3VjPavv@lap> <CAFZYV3NTF8kfb=x1nP1uVaVShMgmFaENqgD2CM57e4ZQ6M4WMQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAJVRA1QMw-OO5DVCzYoTSPzxprWJKZtfLMz3WLGx2iM9GL-pQA@mail.gmail.com> <11011018.QPPdtXFcDq@lap> <[email protected]>

On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 4:23 AM, John Young <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ubiquitous use of a comsec system is a vulnerability, whether
> PGP or Tor or another popular means.


"Ubiquitous trust in technology without assurances nor fail-safes is a
vulnerability"
  - fixed that for you JYA

plenty of corollaries in architecture, to be sure.

;)

References:
- To Tor or not to Tor?
  - From: [email protected] (rysiek)
- To Tor or not to Tor?
  - From: [email protected] (APX 808)
- To Tor or not to Tor?
  - From: [email protected] (coderman)
- To Tor or not to Tor?
  - From: [email protected] (rysiek)
- To Tor or not to Tor?
  - From: [email protected] (John Young)

Prev by Date: To Tor or not to Tor?
Next by Date: The National Security Agency at the Crossroads (Austin: Apr 3-4)
Previous by thread: To Tor or not to Tor?
Next by thread: [cryptography] To Tor or not to Tor?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread