
Do You See What I See? Differential Treatment of Anonymous Users [pdf] - aburan28
http://sec.cs.ucl.ac.uk/users/smurdoch/papers/ndss16doyousee.pdf
======
nickpsecurity
"The utility of anonymous communication is un- dermined by a growing number of
websites treating users of such services in a degraded fashion."

Oh no. I see it totally differently: differential treatment of "anonymous,
unaccountable" users vs "anonymous" users. The Tor model essentially requires
the average admin to trust everyone not to abuse their access unless extra
work is done on top of that. It also has about zero incentive for most content
producers on the web given the pro-surveillance nature of their operation that
_users_ created with their negative response to paid content and access.

So, it makes sense for them to filter out Tor and other anonymity schemes both
for reducing their negatives and adding to their positives. This is why high
security starts with user and environment requirements before producing a
design. Previous experience that didn't do that showed people would ignore or
work around resulting systems. This is also an easy work around compared to
many. A dumb idea to fight economics and human nature in something that is
supposed to get massive, mainstream use. At the least, it will encounter lots
of resistance. At worst, it will totally fail.

------
j_s
What is this? Proof that Tor users are treated differently.

