
Tor is supposed to hide you online. In this case, it did the opposite - aburan28
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/12/18/tor-is-supposed-to-hide-you-online-in-this-harvard-students-case-it-did-the-opposite/
======
TillE
It's not even close to "the opposite". If the kid had sent the email without
Tor, they'd be instantly able to prove it was him.

With Tor, it could only be a suspicion. Not proof.

~~~
mike-cardwell
Yeah. "Opposite" would be Tor outing you as the source of the bomb threat. In
this case, it was simply ineffective because it was used incorrectly. Tor
doesn't claim to hide the fact that you are using it.

------
russelluresti
It will be interesting to see this case go to court. Unless I'm not reading
the article correctly, it sounds like all they have are (1) an email came
through about a bomb threat and (2) that a student was using Tor at the time
the email went through. It doesn't seem they actually have concrete proof that
the email came from this particular student. Which, to me, sounds like
circumstantial evidence.

~~~
URSpider94
He confessed. Even if he had not, I'm sure they could have run forensics on
his laptop to find traces of the email. All they needed was probable cause to
narrow the investigation, which they got.

You also seem to be under the impression that circumstantial evidence would
not be enough to convict -- it often is, when combined with motive. I'm
guessing the suspect had finals in those buildings that day, and was under
considerable stress.

