AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Tor brazzers passwords12/28/2023 But I see no reason for why the first case I presented should be forbidden. This does create a bit of a connundrum - where you often can't tell if parallel construction was used to cover for legal, or for illegal behaviour. Now, if the plains-clothes officer was doing warrant-less break and entry in order to observe you doing the crime, that would be an ethical problem. I see no reason why the uniformed cop should be compelled to reveal his source. The purpose of the poisoned tree doctrine is to prevent the police from committing crimes as part of their work.īut if a plains-clothes police officer sees you load a kilo of cocaine into your car every Tuesday, on the same street corner, there's nothing illegal or immoral about him telling a uniformed cop to show up next Tuesday, to observe you doing just that. The purpose of laws like the 4A is to prevent the police from harassing innocent people by going on fishing expeditions. You can still hide the content of communication using PGP-style strong encryption, but even then, it's likely that keys could be compromised in some manner. There doesn't seem to be any way for two anonymous parties to find and connect with each other across tor in this manner however, without having some other side channel to coordinate time and place and exchange identifying information. The device was used for no other purpose, never turned on and connected to his home network, etc. Snowden's method IIRC was to acquire a laptop or phone without leaving any identifying marks (ownership information), then drive around until he found an open wireless network which he could log onto, then he'd use that network over tor to connect to the journalists he was talking to. However, nation-states with enough backdoors to all the servers serving as tor jumpboxes could likely deanonymize the remote user (it's assumed they'd be watching all traffic going to and from the known endpoint, which in Snowden's case was a journalist's email server). The content of the communication itself would not be readable due to strong encryption, but the metadata (source and destination headers) could reveal who was talking to who. When tor falls, the next question is "what do they see?" You have control over that.Īccording to various sources, such as Snowden's "Permanent Record", the tor network was designed to allow spies in remote locations to communicate securely with a known endpoint (such as CIA headquarters) without anyone being able to easily trace their exact location. You still have to take measures to separate your identity from the device, the behavior, and the location. government has significant interest in prosecuting, that device should be considered compromised and adversarial - you should act accordingly. If you're sitting in front of a computer that you're using for something the U.S. And even then, you're at risk of parallel construction. Your only safety net, it seems, is the value of other targets relative to you when it comes to them burning their "golden ticket" zero day. It's fairly safe to assume they have the ability to deanonymize you. If your adversary is a state actor, particularly the U.S., tor alone is not sufficient for anonymity. The FBI has also continued to run CSAM websites after takeover to collect intel, and likely run honeypots for other content. Recently this has started getting increasing levels of press exposure including in CSAM cases. I have second hand knowledge of lawsuits that have been dropped by the FBI during discovery because it would require them revealing zero days they have on Tor.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |