
'Dissent,' a New Type of Security Tool, Could Improve Online Anonymity - escapologybb
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/dissent-a-new-type-of-security-tool-could-markedly-improve-online-anonymity
======
pakled_engineer
Dissent uses NIST P-256, which according to djb on the TLS working group
mailing list contains unexplained constants [http://www.ietf.org/mail-
archive/web/tls/current/msg10149.ht...](http://www.ietf.org/mail-
archive/web/tls/current/msg10149.html) also fails his safe curve criteria
[http://safecurves.cr.yp.to/](http://safecurves.cr.yp.to/)

~~~
siegecraft
That seems like a fairly serious blunder given the project's stated goals but
hopefully just an oversight or byproduct of an immature product that's still a
proof of concept. If it never gets changed then I don't see how anyone could
take the project seriously.

------
hollerith
Before TOR, there was mature security software called the anonymous remailer.
"mature": the software had already gone through 3 iterations of design and
implementation and was well-regarded by security professionals and security
activists.

Problem was that not enough people _used_ the network of remailers to provide
anonymity. So, the maintainers of the third-generation remailer software
(Mixminion) switched to working on TOR, reasoning that if TOR succeeded then a
remailer network could be deployed on top of TOR.

The developers did not try to compete with TOR by running web traffic over the
remailer network because it was too slow for that.

Point is that being slower than TOR can be fatal for an anonymity network.

------
Asbostos
Won't work if the government blocks it. Just like they do with Tor in China.

------
lisper
Public anonymity is actually pretty useless for political dissent. If a
statement is made anonymously you can't know whether it is the work of the
freedom fighter or the government propaganda office. What you want for
political dissent is not anonymity, but separable identity bindings (c.f.
Satoshi Nakamoto).

Public anonymity is useful for one thing, though: providing plausible
deniability for the distribution of pirated content and child pornography.

~~~
api
You're right to some extent, except in cases where the data is easily
verifiable by a third party.

I also think you're right that anonymity is of limited use for deeper reasons:
it doesn't inspire, and it shows a lack of courage. Real change happens when
people publicly stand up against power -- at risk to themselves, their
livelihoods, their friends, and their families. Real change requires the will
to put yourself in harm's way, but that will is precisely what inspires others
to do the same and actually gets the ball rolling. A bunch of anonymous trolls
will never inspire resistance _even if they 're right_ because they are not
taking a leadership role.

Unfortunate that you're getting disagreement-downvoted for making a valid
criticism.

~~~
sarc
The answer is counter-intuitive. It's interesting, so hopefully the author
will go into detail.

