On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 19:51:04 -0700 Mirimir <miri...@riseup.net> wrote:
> On 12/12/2014 06:33 PM, Juan wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 15:18:29 -0700 > > Mirimir <miri...@riseup.net> wrote: > > > >> On 12/12/2014 01:43 PM, Juan wrote: > >>> On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 14:20:12 -0500 > >>> Roger Dingledine <a...@mit.edu> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 03:23:42PM -0300, Juan wrote: > >>>>>> You might like > >>>>>> https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq#Backdoor > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We won't put backdoors in Tor. Ever. > >>>>> > >>>>> LOL! > >>>>> > >>>>> You work for the pentagon and are subjects of the US > >>>>> state. > >>>>> > >>>>> The US government has secret 'courts' and secretly > >>>>> forces its subjects to tamper with all kinds of 'security' > >>>>> systems, in the name of 'national security'. > >>>>> > >>>>> Whatever public declamations you make carry very little > >>>>> weight. > >> > >> <SNIP> > >> > >> Well, who do you work for, then? > > > > > > Whatever work I do is none of your business since it has > > nothing to do with politics. > > So you say ;) Yes. You don't trust me? You are not implying you believe in your own 'conspiracy theories' eh? =) But here's the thing. It's trivial for Roger and friends to look me up in any of their .mil databases. So they know or can easily know. You as a 'fan' of some project of the US state may not have that kind of info but rest assured other people do. > > > But you asked your loaded question anyway. Since I call out > > the 'democratic' 'liberal' americunt tor project I must work for > > somebody else? The chinese? The muslamic terrists? Moscow? > > Take your pick. > > OK, I was just curious to see what you'd say. Fine. And? What conclusion do you draw from my answer? > > > No, the fact that I laugh at the US government, its > > lackeys, and its sick propaganda doesn't mean I work for any other > > political organization. I am politicallly independent. Something you > > might not be. > > Nope. I'm total freelance. Good. > > >> Your arguments have little weight without evidence that Tor has > >> been tampered with on behalf of the US government. > > > > Whatever you say bro. Notice how you're unable to counter > > any single thing I said. That's why you > > > > <SNIP>ed my whole message. > > I snipped your interchange with Roger because I have nothing new to > add. Roger says: "No backdoors. Ever." And you argue that statements > by American subjects who work for its government can't be trusted. > But as you and Roger seem to agree, it's all just words. What's to > counter? To clarify, just in case. My analysis isn't "just words". It's a sound analysis. The tor project is hardly to be trusted and people saying "trust us, we're the good guys" are pretty much mocking the audience. *Their* assertions are "just words". > > My point, which you sidestep, is that it's past time for you to > produce some evidence for backdoors in Tor. Did I ever state "there are backdoors"? No I didn't. You are asking for evidence to back up something I never said. On the other hand, what would a backdoor in tor or similar software look like? I'm guessing there are no 'backdoors' in tor, only 'bugs'. I think it's called "plausible deniability" or something like that... >You and your associates WHat associates are those? > are free to inspect the source code, to probe the network as you like > with your relays and clients, and to do whatever else you can > imagine. Go for it. Why on earth should I do other people's work? Help the propaganda efforts of the US government? Please =) > > > Even Roger knows better than that... > > I'm not interested in debating. Oh. And what are you doing, exactly, when you reply to my messages? > It would be repetitious and boring. Yeah... J. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
