201
Tor says it’s "still safe" amid reports of police deanonymizing users
(www.bleepingcomputer.com)
this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
201 points (97.2% liked)
Privacy
31814 readers
247 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The only relevant pages I found are I2P's threat model and the comparison between I2P and TOR:
Please cite your sources so everyone can understand the reasoning for your claims of I2P being weaker than TOR.
Oh, and A LOT of the attacks mentioned in the page on threat models is/was possible on TOR. The I2P project follows TOR carefully and implements some of their features/mitigations too.
If we're talking specifically about brute-force DDOS, BOTH TOR and I2P faced these issues. The good thing about I2P is that it is more decentralized than TOR which can sometimes make it easier to mitigate.
Your points about I2P's directory (not sure what you mean by DNS here) can be lumped together with your complaints about usability. This DOES NOT make TOR inherently more private, secure and anonymous than I2P, it just means that somebody on Windows can download the TBB and start browsing (in albeit a not-very-secure way). Unless you missed the news, I2P now has a slick Windows installer so people don't have to fiddle too much with it.
You're going to have to give me evidence for me to believe that using I2P makes a substantial dent in your available bandwidth. Yes you're a router in the network but it doesn't mean that you're passing through traffic at GB/s speeds.
I never said that. Again, I'm not comparing I2P and TOR based on their usability (which has changed in the recent years), I'm comparing them in terms of anonymity on the wider internet when browsing using either protocol. Both TOR and I2P are great projects, the problem is that TOR is significantly more centralized.
Cite your sources for this. This is mere conjecture unless you have proof of metadata leakage on I2P but not on TOR/actual people getting caught using I2P but being safe on TOR. I'm sure the I2P Devs would be very interested too. If you're in restrictive regimes like Iran and China where TOR/I2P traffic is flagged - use a bridge or a VPN disguised as HTTPS traffic and hope for the best (it's a perpetual cat and mouse game).
Again, please cite your sources when making claims about technical shortcomings of I2P