Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-11-11 Thread Scott Bennett
 On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 04:35:59 + (UTC) John Case c...@sdf.lonestar.org
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009, Sharif Olorin wrote:

 Bids like Kaspersky's are exceptionally unlikely to be successful. The
 people who keep the Internet running are, for the most part, the
 people who are most opposed to this kind of control.

 If The Internet
 is restricted in such ridiculous ways as Kaspersky suggests, then
 other internets will just spring up to replace it.

 For those who don't know, such a project already exists, run by
 Freaknet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netsukuku


Netsukuku is very interesting.

It's also very difficult to tell whether it is gibberish or not:

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/10/6/101832/209

I want very much for it to be real.

 This may be slightly off topic, but there is some software around
that might be considered prerequisite components for networking schemes
like Netsukuku.  802.11s is in various stages of implementation already.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11s
http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_26#head-26b4a3f6eb606c21056e4f906a4dae88077346f5
http://wiki.freebsd.org/WifiMesh
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3561.txt


  Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet:   bennett at cs.niu.edu  *
**
* A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good  *
* objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
* -- a standing army.   *
*-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 *
**
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/



Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-11-11 Thread Flamsmark

 hIf The Internet
 is restricted in such ridiculous ways as Kaspersky suggests, then
 other internets will just spring up to replace it.


 For those who don't know, such a project already exists, run by
 Freaknet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netsukuku



 Netsukuku is very interesting.

 It's also very difficult to tell whether it is gibberish or not:

 http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/10/6/101832/209

 I want very much for it to be real.


Looks like a bunch of gibberish to me; and not very good gibberish at that.


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-11-11 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 08:41:28AM -0500, Flamsmark wrote:

  I want very much for it to be real.
 
 Looks like a bunch of gibberish to me; and not very good gibberish at that.

It might well that it is gibberish, but the concept itself
is sound. You can route simply (using only local knowledge) 
in dense node assemblies (both 2d and 3d) where link density 
decays with distance, especially if link latency is a good 
measure of distance, which is especially 
true for very large networks and/or for line of sight and/or 
relativistic cut-through.

With DTN this can be used for mobile nodes, whether on
foot, car, balloon, plane or birds in LEO. 

-- 
Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a http://leitl.org
__
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-11-10 Thread Brian Mearns
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 9:04 PM, John Case c...@sdf.lonestar.org wrote:

 On Sun, 18 Oct 2009, Jacob Todd wrote:
[clip]
 I'd like to change the design of the Internet by introducing
 regulation--Internet passports, Internet police and international
 agreement--about following Internet standards. And if some countries
 don't agree with or don't pay attention to the agreement, just cut
 them off.


 Let's say this is successful ... it will simply lead to a parallel, mostly
 wireless network that is even more decentralized than the current Internet.
  How much does it cost these days to link 10mbps across 10 km ?

 In a few years, with n hardware flooding the market, how much will it cost
 to link 100mbps across 50 km ?
[clip]

Agreed. You would think a man at the head of an Internet Security firm
would have a better understand of Internet vs. internet. His comment
about the Internet being designed illustrates to me that he doesn't
actually know much about the history of networking, and apparently
doesn't even have a good understanding of how ad-hoc these things
really are.

Anyway, like I said, I totally agree with your point. If The Internet
is restricted in such ridiculous ways as Kaspersky suggests, then
other internets will just spring up to replace it. Maybe to this end
we should all make an effort to establish de-centralized networks in
our own worlds: connect a few neighbors together with CAT5, or hell,
even RS232, and you've got a network. Connect one of these to the
neighbors on the next block, and you've got an internet. How about
Sneakernets? Onion routing by snail-mail and courier? Packet
transmission by encrypted email? The Internet grew out of nothing,
once, and that when network theory was only in its infancy. There's no
reason we couldn't go it again.

-Brian

-- 
Feel free to contact me using PGP Encryption:
Key Id: 0x3AA70848
Available from: http://keys.gnupg.net
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-11-10 Thread krishna e bera
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:29:26PM -0500, Brian Mearns wrote:
 On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 9:04 PM, John Case c...@sdf.lonestar.org wrote:
  On Sun, 18 Oct 2009, Jacob Todd wrote:
 [clip]
  I'd like to change the design of the Internet by introducing
  regulation--Internet passports, Internet police and international
  agreement--about following Internet standards. And if some countries
  don't agree with or don't pay attention to the agreement, just cut
  them off.
 
 
  Let's say this is successful ... it will simply lead to a parallel, mostly
  wireless network that is even more decentralized than the current Internet.
   How much does it cost these days to link 10mbps across 10 km ?
 
  In a few years, with n hardware flooding the market, how much will it cost
  to link 100mbps across 50 km ?
 [clip]
 
 Agreed. You would think a man at the head of an Internet Security firm
 would have a better understand of Internet vs. internet. His comment
 about the Internet being designed illustrates to me that he doesn't
 actually know much about the history of networking, and apparently
 doesn't even have a good understanding of how ad-hoc these things
 really are.
 
 Anyway, like I said, I totally agree with your point. If The Internet
 is restricted in such ridiculous ways as Kaspersky suggests, then
 other internets will just spring up to replace it. Maybe to this end
 we should all make an effort to establish de-centralized networks in
 our own worlds: connect a few neighbors together with CAT5, or hell,
 even RS232, and you've got a network. Connect one of these to the
 neighbors on the next block, and you've got an internet. How about
 Sneakernets? Onion routing by snail-mail and courier? Packet
 transmission by encrypted email? The Internet grew out of nothing,
 once, and that when network theory was only in its infancy. There's no
 reason we couldn't go it again.
 
 -Brian

I havent read Kaspersky's report but the general argument is supportable.
The hardware on which the high speed internet runs is increasingly concentrated
under fewer owners.  How many internet access providers exist where you live
and do they significantly differ in Terms of Service, i.e. friendly to privacy?
Google alone now carries from 6 to 10% of all the traffic.
viz. http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/10/youtube-bandwidth/

The laws governing (or attempting to) what is allowed on the internet
are also swinging in favour of more control and traceability.  
Indeed, if the ACTA currently being negotiated is implemented,
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/leaked-acta-internet-provisions-three-strikes-and-
Tor could well become illegal, (a) because it can be used to circumvent
restriction of copyrighted content by country and (b) because you can use it
to hide identity while filesharing (even though we discourage that).
EFF and friends succeeded in repealing some PATRIOT act insanity,
but national insecurity and corporate greed continue to infect
all areas of law and social reality including the internet.

Anyway, there is a volunteer project which may help Tor work 
on the kind of grassroots internet you describe:
https://www.torproject.org/volunteer.html.en
Simulator for slow Internet connections 
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-11-10 Thread Sharif Olorin
Bids like Kaspersky's are exceptionally unlikely to be successful. The
people who keep the Internet running are, for the most part, the
people who are most opposed to this kind of control.

 If The Internet
 is restricted in such ridiculous ways as Kaspersky suggests, then
 other internets will just spring up to replace it.

For those who don't know, such a project already exists, run by
Freaknet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netsukuku

Sharif Olorin

-- 
PGP/GPG key ID: 5738DC39
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-11-10 Thread John Case


On Wed, 11 Nov 2009, Sharif Olorin wrote:


Bids like Kaspersky's are exceptionally unlikely to be successful. The
people who keep the Internet running are, for the most part, the
people who are most opposed to this kind of control.


If The Internet
is restricted in such ridiculous ways as Kaspersky suggests, then
other internets will just spring up to replace it.


For those who don't know, such a project already exists, run by
Freaknet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netsukuku



Netsukuku is very interesting.

It's also very difficult to tell whether it is gibberish or not:

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/10/6/101832/209

I want very much for it to be real.
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-10-21 Thread grarpamp
 And all the world is silent for this tyrannical  innovation...

One might suggest to join together all the random anon
activist groups to counter this cause of innovation with
a new corporate voice. Perhaps the worldwide spread
of the Pirat Partiet will take upon this cause. But they
would need a corporate branch... like Sinn Fein to the IRA.
Kaspersky has that anti-anon voice, who will counter?
Where are the ISP's offering onion/i2p/anon hosting,
no logs, etc...
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-10-21 Thread Flamsmark
2009/10/21 grarpamp grarp...@gmail.com

 Perhaps the worldwide spread
 of the Pirat Partiet will take upon this cause. But they
 would need a corporate branch... like Sinn Fein to the IRA.


I don't really want to stretch this analogy too far, and I certainly don't
think that it's reasonable to compare people who obtain, share and
distribute media in ways often suggested to violate local laws; with an
organised group of armed political activists/terrorists who killed many in
bombings. Nonetheless, wouldn't Piratpartiet already be the Sinn Fein
(completely legitimate political arm) to the massive group of sometimes
self-identified pirates (the legally dubious underground organisation)?


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-10-21 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 08:35:10AM -0400, Flamsmark wrote:

 I don't really want to stretch this analogy too far, and I certainly don't
 think that it's reasonable to compare people who obtain, share and
 distribute media in ways often suggested to violate local laws; with an
 organised group of armed political activists/terrorists who killed many in
 bombings. Nonetheless, wouldn't Piratpartiet already be the Sinn Fein
 (completely legitimate political arm) to the massive group of sometimes
 self-identified pirates (the legally dubious underground organisation)?

Spoken as a Pirate Party member, that's pure slander.

Among its many goals, Pirate Party does not want to abolish copyright 
altogether.
However, it definitely wants to change the current status quo, which is 
unacceptable, and hurts both the artists/content producers and consumers.

-- 
Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a http://leitl.org
__
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-10-21 Thread Flamsmark
2009/10/21 Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org

 On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 08:35:10AM -0400, Flamsmark wrote:

  I don't really want to stretch this analogy too far, and I certainly
 don't
  think that it's reasonable to compare people who obtain, share and
  distribute media in ways often suggested to violate local laws; with an
  organised group of armed political activists/terrorists who killed many
 in
  bombings. Nonetheless, wouldn't Piratpartiet already be the Sinn Fein
  (completely legitimate political arm) to the massive group of sometimes
  self-identified pirates (the legally dubious underground organisation)?

 Spoken as a Pirate Party member, that's pure slander.

 Among its many goals, Pirate Party does not want to abolish copyright
 altogether.
 However, it definitely wants to change the current status quo, which is
 unacceptable, and hurts both the artists/content producers and consumers.


I don't think that Sinn Fein enjoyed the death and fear that was the result
of IRA actions either. However, they shared a belief in a more unified
Ireland, much as 'pirates' and Piratpartiet share a belief in more
reasonable copyright laws, and execution, as well as a variety of other
electronic and surveillance freedom issues. If you think that what I said
was slanderous, you may be interpreting more of a normative view than I was
trying to espouse.


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-10-21 Thread Scott Bennett
 On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 09:09:27 -0400 Flamsmark flamsm...@gmail.com
wrote:
2009/10/21 Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org

 On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 08:35:10AM -0400, Flamsmark wrote:

  I don't really want to stretch this analogy too far, and I certainly
 don't
  think that it's reasonable to compare people who obtain, share and
  distribute media in ways often suggested to violate local laws; with an
  organised group of armed political activists/terrorists who killed many
 in
  bombings. Nonetheless, wouldn't Piratpartiet already be the Sinn Fein
  (completely legitimate political arm) to the massive group of sometimes
  self-identified pirates (the legally dubious underground organisation)?

 Spoken as a Pirate Party member, that's pure slander.

 Among its many goals, Pirate Party does not want to abolish copyright
 altogether.
 However, it definitely wants to change the current status quo, which is
 unacceptable, and hurts both the artists/content producers and consumers.


I don't think that Sinn Fein enjoyed the death and fear that was the result
of IRA actions either. However, they shared a belief in a more unified
Ireland, much as 'pirates' and Piratpartiet share a belief in more
reasonable copyright laws, and execution, as well as a variety of other
electronic and surveillance freedom issues. If you think that what I said
was slanderous, you may be interpreting more of a normative view than I was
trying to espouse.

 Is this still about tor?  Or has it strayed enough that it should depart
this list for more appropriate fora?


  Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet:   bennett at cs.niu.edu  *
**
* A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good  *
* objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
* -- a standing army.   *
*-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 *
**
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-10-21 Thread Alexander Cherepanov
Hi!

It's a pity that Russia becomes the source of nonsense for 
international news, again.

But it would be even more pity for tor to be associated with such 
political bullshit as quoted below.

Alexander Cherepanov

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 09:03:32 +0400, James Brown jbrownfi...@gmail.com wrote:

 Very thanks for this information.
 I think that A/V is a big shit so as an antivirus product and as the
 above causes.
 But that problem is more than that bla-bla-bla from Mr. Kaspersky.
 Mr. Kaspersky is only a dirty prostitute of the bloody new Russian
 Putin's and Medvedev's dictatorial regim.
 His words about fighting anonimity and the Tor is only executing of
 instructions of Putin's satraps.
 Some weeks ago Mr. Nurgaliev, the chief of the criminal organization
 the Ministry of Interior of Russia the real functions of which is like
 of functions the nazi SS, told such words.
 And after Mr. Kaspersky such words conserning ban the anonimity are told
 by a representative of the Russian Orthodox Church - the orqanizations
 of extreme yahooism, which also prositute for the Putin's bloody
 dictatorship.
 I want that the World will know that the regim of Putin and Medvedev is
 the bloodiest tyranical regim last centuries, like the Hitler's regim or
 exen worse.
 Now there are many people arested, disappered or simply killed without
 any proceedings in Russia.
 There are no independent just court in Russia, all courts stamp
 decisions needed for this regim against honest people.
 Only one wishing to eat in hunger Russia, only trying to earn for eating
 and only one word  against Putin, Medvedev or members ot their band
 named United Russia (/Edinaya Rossiya) /now consider by Putin's 
 terrible inquisition as a crime and as a ground for an arrest, an
 imprisonment or simply for a murder of such dissident.
 Two weaks ago in Moscow the bloody Putin's secret police arrested a
 young girl about 20 years for only her writing in internet-forums and
 detain her in terrible Putin's torture chambers.
 It is very terrible to live in Russia this days!
 I am afraid that this speeching of Nurgaliev, Kaspersky and of a cleric
 may be a preparation for establishing of criminal ban of using Tor an etc.
 As you know, for the fighting with anonimity they establsih that from 1
 October 2009 a person wanted to purshase a domain name in the ru zone
 must submit his passport!!!
 And all the world is silent for this tyrannical  innovation...



***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-10-21 Thread Andrew Lewman
On 10/21/2009 10:00 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
 I don't think that Sinn Fein enjoyed the death and fear that was the result
 of IRA actions either. However, they shared a belief in a more unified
 Ireland, much as 'pirates' and Piratpartiet share a belief in more
 reasonable copyright laws, and execution, as well as a variety of other
 electronic and surveillance freedom issues. If you think that what I said
 was slanderous, you may be interpreting more of a normative view than I was
 trying to espouse.

  Is this still about tor?  Or has it strayed enough that it should depart
 this list for more appropriate fora?

Yes, this has strayed enough off topic.  Kaspersky doesn't like online
anonymity, we get it.

-- 
Andrew Lewman
The Tor Project
pgp 0x31B0974B

Website: https://torproject.org/
Blog: https://blog.torproject.org/
Identi.ca: torproject
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-10-20 Thread James Brown
Kyle Williams wrote:
 People who seek to control society fear society having anonymity, for
 it's with anonymity that society can stand up against corruption of
 the state when it occurs.  The latest Iran election and the actions
 that followed are a great example of this, and it's was technology
 such as Tor that helped them get the truth out about what was being
 done.  When was the last time a trojan horse or virus helped a country
 regain liberty or help bypass censorship?  To treat Tor as such
 malware is down right insulting to people's rights everywhere.

 Normally I would never think about the following, but as a developer,
 I'm weighing the idea of detecting, disabling, and/or deleting
 Kaspersky before installing any of the projects I work on.  Such
 action should be brought to the users attention, and the action to do
 something about it should be evoked by the user.  However, if
 Kaspersky does go too far and labels Tor as malware, you can be damn
 sure JanusVM, *maybe* Tor VM, and Chromium Browser VM will take
 automated action to prevent itself from being attacked by Kaspersky
 products, and will do so in a very harsh way.

 Something worth noting, today's A/V solutions do not scan inside
 virtual machines and would not be able to detect Tor easily.  Use
 encryption with the VM and it'll be impossible for any A/V product to
 scan the data inside.  If you use an external anonymity device like
 januspa or a linux router + Tor, then you would not feel the affects
 of bad A/V software against your anonymity.

 Personally, I will be encouraging everyone I know to stay as far away
 from this company and their products simply out of principle at this
 point.  I had no problem with Kaspersky until I read this.  If
 Kaspersky is going to treat non malicious software as malware, then we
 might as well treat their software with the same regard.

 Spread the word, Kaspersky Labs is not a friend of Tor.

 Best regards,
 Kyle

 All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do
 nothing. - Edmund Burke
 ***
 To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
 unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/

   

Very thanks for this information.
I think that A/V is a big shit so as an antivirus product and as the
above causes.
But that problem is more than that bla-bla-bla from Mr. Kaspersky.
Mr. Kaspersky is only a dirty prostitute of the bloody new Russian
Putin's and Medvedev's dictatorial regim.
His words about fighting anonimity and the Tor is only executing of
instructions of Putin's satraps.
Some weeks ago Mr. Nurgaliev, the chief of the criminal organization
the Ministry of Interior of Russia the real functions of which is like
of functions the nazi SS, told such words.
And after Mr. Kaspersky such words conserning ban the anonimity are told
by a representative of the Russian Orthodox Church - the orqanizations
of extreme yahooism, which also prositute for the Putin's bloody
dictatorship.
I want that the World will know that the regim of Putin and Medvedev is
the bloodiest tyranical regim last centuries, like the Hitler's regim or
exen worse.
Now there are many people arested, disappered or simply killed without
any proceedings in Russia.
There are no independent just court in Russia, all courts stamp
decisions needed for this regim against honest people.
Only one wishing to eat in hunger Russia, only trying to earn for eating
and only one word  against Putin, Medvedev or members ot their band
named United Russia (/Edinaya Rossiya) /now consider by Putin's 
terrible inquisition as a crime and as a ground for an arrest, an
imprisonment or simply for a murder of such dissident.
Two weaks ago in Moscow the bloody Putin's secret police arrested a
young girl about 20 years for only her writing in internet-forums and
detain her in terrible Putin's torture chambers.
It is very terrible to live in Russia this days!
I am afraid that this speeching of Nurgaliev, Kaspersky and of a cleric
may be a preparation for establishing of criminal ban of using Tor an etc.
As you know, for the fighting with anonimity they establsih that from 1
October 2009 a person wanted to purshase a domain name in the ru zone
must submit his passport!!!
And all the world is silent for this tyrannical  innovation...

***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/


Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-10-18 Thread Jacob Todd
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 04:38:57AM -0700, Kyle Williams wrote:
 I just read two articles that moved me to bring this to the attention
 of others.  Kaspersky Labs thinks anonymity is the problem with the
 Internet.
 
 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/16/kaspersky_rebukes_net_anonymity/
 
 In Kaspersky's world, services such as Psiphon and The Onion Router
 (Tor) - which are legitimately used by Chinese dissidents and Google
 users alike to shield personally identifiable information - would no
 longer be legal. Or at least they'd have to be redesigned from the
 ground up to give police the ability to surveil them. That's not the
 kind of world many law-abiding citizens would feel comfortable
 inhabiting.
 
 
 He's talking about supporting a police state, where the law can
 watch everything you do.
 
 http://www.zdnetasia.com/insight/security/0,39044829,62058697,00.htm
 
 [Q:] Are you saying that people often don't understand the
 complexities of the work security researchers are involved in?
 Consumers, businesses and even governments?
 [A:] Governments do understand because they are more and more in touch
 with these problems. Enterprises, big enterprises, some of them have
 dedicated teams of security experts and they really understand what's
 going on. Consumers generally have no clue, but they don't need to
 understand.
 
 
 The only thing that works better than his A/V software is a well
 informed and educated user.
 My mom didn't know shit about what to do and not to do on the Internet
 and downloaded everything that was free, and that's why I would have
 to fix his computer every few months even though she uses AVG and
 SpyBot.  Finally I sat her down, explained to her why this was
 happening, and told her not to do that anymore if she wanted her
 computer to work right.  She listened, and hasn't had any serious
 problems for a few years now.
 
 From the same article...
 
 [Q:] If you had the power to change up to three things in the world
 today that are related to IT security, what would they be?
 [A:] Internet design--that's enough.
 
 [Q:] That's it? What's wrong with the design of the Internet?
 [A:] There's anonymity. Everyone should and must have an
 identification, or Internet passport. The Internet was designed not
 for public use, but for American scientists and the U.S. military.
 That was just a limited group of people--hundreds, or maybe thousands.
 Then it was introduced to the public and it was wrong…to introduce it
 in the same way.
 I'd like to change the design of the Internet by introducing
 regulation--Internet passports, Internet police and international
 agreement--about following Internet standards. And if some countries
 don't agree with or don't pay attention to the agreement, just cut
 them off.
 
 
 This is scary talk from a man who owns the largest anti-virus company
 in the eastern hemisphere.  Read these articles, and you'll see this
 guy talks about a global Internet police or Internet Interpol.
 That's serious globalization talk from someone who millions trust to
 protect their computers.  All they need to do is label some code as
 malicious, and it'll be removed from your PC after the next A/V
 updateeven if you use it to regain lost civil liberties.  How long
 until Kaspersky labels Tor a trojan or virus?  If that happens, then
 what?
 
 People who seek to control society fear society having anonymity, for
 it's with anonymity that society can stand up against corruption of
 the state when it occurs.  The latest Iran election and the actions
 that followed are a great example of this, and it's was technology
 such as Tor that helped them get the truth out about what was being
 done.  When was the last time a trojan horse or virus helped a country
 regain liberty or help bypass censorship?  To treat Tor as such
 malware is down right insulting to people's rights everywhere.
 
 Normally I would never think about the following, but as a developer,
 I'm weighing the idea of detecting, disabling, and/or deleting
 Kaspersky before installing any of the projects I work on.  Such
 action should be brought to the users attention, and the action to do
 something about it should be evoked by the user.  However, if
 Kaspersky does go too far and labels Tor as malware, you can be damn
 sure JanusVM, *maybe* Tor VM, and Chromium Browser VM will take
 automated action to prevent itself from being attacked by Kaspersky
 products, and will do so in a very harsh way.
 
 Something worth noting, today's A/V solutions do not scan inside
 virtual machines and would not be able to detect Tor easily.  Use
 encryption with the VM and it'll be impossible for any A/V product to
 scan the data inside.  If you use an external anonymity device like
 januspa or a linux router + Tor, then you would not feel the affects
 of bad A/V software against your anonymity.
 
 Personally, I will be encouraging everyone I know to stay as far away
 from this company and their products simply out of 

Re: Kaspersky wants to make Tor illegal and supports a globalized policed internet.

2009-10-18 Thread John Case


On Sun, 18 Oct 2009, Jacob Todd wrote:


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/16/kaspersky_rebukes_net_anonymity/

In Kaspersky's world, services such as??Psiphon??and??The Onion Router
(Tor)??- which are legitimately used by Chinese dissidents and Google
users alike to shield personally identifiable information - would no
longer be legal. Or at least they'd have to be redesigned from the
ground up to give police the ability to surveil them. That's not the
kind of world many law-abiding citizens would feel comfortable
inhabiting.



As far as any authority is concerned , one bit of SSL traffic is 
indistinguishable from any other bit of SSL traffic.  So while current 
anonymity models may not be workable in 5 or 10 years, if people are 
generating strongly encrypted traffic to arbitrary hosts, _some_ models 
will be workable.


Multinational, corporate interests will not allow information security 
(SSL, VPNs) to just go away.  Further, if TPTB have broken SSL, they 
aren't going to tip their hand to the rest of the world to blow the nym 
you access twitter with.


I am pessimistic about the march of freedom and the limits of state power, 
but these are now basic to all commerce and infrastructure worldwide.  The 
cats out of the bag, I'm afraid.




He's talking about supporting a police state, where the law can
watch everything you do.

http://www.zdnetasia.com/insight/security/0,39044829,62058697,00.htm

[Q:] Are you saying that people often don't understand the
complexities of the work security researchers are involved in?
Consumers, businesses and even governments?
[A:] Governments do understand because they are more and more in touch
with these problems. Enterprises, big enterprises, some of them have
dedicated teams of security experts and they really understand what's
going on. Consumers generally have no clue, but they don't need to
understand.



He's lobbying.  He sees the money that cisco, et. al, have made building 
the great firewall and he wants a piece of the action.




I'd like to change the design of the Internet by introducing
regulation--Internet passports, Internet police and international
agreement--about following Internet standards. And if some countries
don't agree with or don't pay attention to the agreement, just cut
them off.



Let's say this is successful ... it will simply lead to a parallel, mostly 
wireless network that is even more decentralized than the current 
Internet.  How much does it cost these days to link 10mbps across 10 km ?


In a few years, with n hardware flooding the market, how much will it 
cost to link 100mbps across 50 km ?




Something worth noting, today's A/V solutions do not scan inside
virtual machines and would not be able to detect Tor easily.  Use
encryption with the VM and it'll be impossible for any A/V product to
scan the data inside.  If you use an external anonymity device like
januspa or a linux router + Tor, then you would not feel the affects
of bad A/V software against your anonymity.

Personally, I will be encouraging everyone I know to stay as far away
from this company and their products simply out of principle at this
point.  I had no problem with Kaspersky until I read this.  If
Kaspersky is going to treat non malicious software as malware, then we
might as well treat their software with the same regard.



Will there really be any intersection between end users using reactionary, 
clueless, least-common-denominator snake oil like this, and users of Tor ?