[90868] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Tor and network security/administration
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Sat Jun 17 11:35:25 2006
To: Jeremy Chadwick <nanog@jdc.parodius.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 17 Jun 2006 06:29:02 PDT."
<20060617132902.GA56012@icarus.home.lan>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 11:34:53 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
--==_Exmh_1150558493_3018P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 06:29:02 PDT, Jeremy Chadwick said:
> A colleague of mine stated his opinion of my opinion: "Your problem
> with Tor is that you can't control it, isn't it?" And he's right --
> that's the exact problem I have with it.
>
> Comments/concerns?
You're complaining about a network of several hundred IP addresses that are,
for the most part, documented as being the source of anonymized connections.
Obviously, if you're worried about *that*, you've already solved the problem of
identifying a connection as coming from one of the millions of machines that
has backdoor software on it, and thus potentially a port forwarder(*).
Please share your secret. The rest of us would love to have a net where Tor
nodes are a "problem" big enough to worry about.
(*) Yes, Tor intentionally anonymizes the true source *very* well. On the flip
side, what are your *REAL* chances of tracking somebody through more than 2 or
3 hops across cablemodems, unless you manage to mobilize everybody by invoking
one of the Four Horsemen of the Internet (copyright, terrorism, drug dealers,
and child pornographers)?
--==_Exmh_1150558493_3018P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFElCEdcC3lWbTT17ARAupVAJ9GPgSjfA2IqAsy783SBhiwIBEmwwCg4P2m
wN94qfkVFL4qg8LowXtJ/4k=
=txU/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1150558493_3018P--
