Readit News logoReadit News
amelius · 14 days ago
> Of course, we need to make sure that the data isn't modified on the way from the client.

Why is this necessary if every layer of the onion is a trustable encrypted link?

MzxgckZtNqX5i · 14 days ago
Relays can be malicious and try to tamper with the data. Think of Tor relay encryption like Signal's E2E encryption, where the relays are analogous to Signal's servers. You want to ensure they can neither see what you sent (confidentiality) nor modify it without detection (integrity).
amelius · 14 days ago
Yes, but if it's all encrypted tunnels inside encrypted tunnels (recursively), then those relays can't really see the data, right?
47282847 · 21 days ago
Cool! Congrats! Awesome work.

Small typo: “observing predicatable changes“

Deleted Comment

sevg · 14 days ago
I think you’re getting downvoted because you’re reporting the typo in an odd and likely unproductive place.

I’m not sure what you expect HN readers to do about the typo. There is a comment section on the blog itself :)

gus_massa · 14 days ago
It's not unusual that the author (or someone of the team) see the trafic peak an appears in HN to reply the questions.

Dead Comment

greekrich92 · 14 days ago
Is it quantum-proof?
vscode-rest · 14 days ago
Quantum isn’t the problem. Majority-internet telemetry is.
ekjhgkejhgk · 14 days ago
Is it alien-proof?
JoachimS · 14 days ago
All information is translated to Finnish at ingress, so yes.
m00dy · 14 days ago
hey guys, anyone believes Tor still can provide anonymity to users ? just trying to ask politely.
dannyobrien · 14 days ago
broadly yes, but the real question is: what's your threat model? https://ssd.eff.org/glossary/threat-model
m00dy · 14 days ago
I mean definitely state level actor, for example, let's say you can access all data centers in EU as most tor nodes are located in EU.
ongy · 14 days ago
Low stakes (IP violations etc.): absolutely

High stakes (military / nation state scale): no

lurker_jMckQT99 · 14 days ago
hey, would you mind elaborating (with sources)?
jstanley · 14 days ago
This FUD comes up whenever Tor is mentioned on Hacker News. The answer is: let's say you think Tor isn't 100% flawless. What are you going to do? Not use Tor? It's better than any other option.
impossiblefork · 14 days ago
What you'd do is that you'd write a distributed remailer where fixed-size messages are sent on fixed timeslots, possibly with some noise in when it's transmitted, with a message always being sent on its timeslot, even if a dummy message must be sent.

I've been writing a system like this in Erlang, intended to be short enough that you can take a picture of the source code and then type it in by hand in a reasonable amount of time, as a sort of protest against Chat Control. I'm not sure I'm going to release it-- after all, they haven't passed it yet, and there are all sorts of problems that this thing could needlessly accelerate, but I've started fiddling with it more intensively recently.

jeroenhd · 14 days ago
While there aren't as many services available, there are alternatives to Tor. Veilid on the protocol level seems to be quite promising, and I2P and other networks also provide some Tor-like features.

If you're trying to browse the web then you won't find many alternatives, but if you're looking to avoid the authorities doing some data exchange, you have options.

matheusmoreira · 14 days ago
The better option is to use Tor while being aware of its caveats and limitations. Don't be lulled into a false sense of security.
bigyabai · 12 days ago
It's not FUD at all. I think you would be utterly shocked how many active alternatives exist, and how small Tor is compared to it's reputation.