Michael StJohns wrote:
On 3/16/2016 3:47 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
As is the nature of a service used by people who need to stay
anonymous for their own safety,
There's the set of TOR users, and there's the subset of TOR users that need
to have the property of "anonymity for safety", and then there's the set of
people who need/want access to the IETF.
Could you provide an educated guess on the size of the intersection of
those last two sets? 1? 10s? 100s? 1000s? More? I'm trying to
understand the amount of hyperbole being slung about.
Finally, are there any other methods besides Tor you can think of that
would give "anonymity for safety" while still providing access to the IETF
data? (Hint: asking a friend to photocopy paper or send you a usb stick....
or...)
I don't have any answer to your question, but a belief that it could grow and
shift over time as governments change. Nobody has addressed the question from
Antonio Prado about setting up ietf.onion. I have never setup or used Tor, so I
may be off base, but it would appear that the IETF could run a Tor router with
a bandwidth-throttled exit policy that blocks all addresses except a mirror
pointed to by the ietf.onion name. Basically a public hidden service.
Attackers could dos the throttle, but other than that, it would appear to
remove the need for the worse-than-useless captcha while not opening up the
IETF to abuse of the relay, and solve the access problem in the subject line.
Tony