Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 04:17:44PM -0500, Joe Btfsplk wrote: As long as funding doesn't come with strings, there's no problem with accepting it. Very true - more so w/ people already using Tor or those that would never look at how Tor is funded. But if some sayings were ever true, it's, Perception is reality, and You're judged by the company you keep. People on the outside looking in, see an organization, whose primary purpose is to provide means to protect privacy, *especially* from gov't agencies, but the major portion of their funding comes FROM a gov't agency. I'm sorry - but no matter how much I or anyone else loves Tor, to many thinking outsiders, it would appear quite fishy (if they know that funding fact). It just don't look right. I think it's fishy - _ I like Tor_. If I'd actually known that fact before I used it, I'd have thought something wasn't right. It may be, if they really want to grow the Tor user base (continually), it may have to appeal to a broader audience, for many of whom the funding source issue may well be a stumbling block. Very true. In Russia, question do you know who funded torproject? (assuming US gov.) arises constantly in disputes about the safety of tor. It is a very stupid argument. But with anti-American sentiment in mind, it sounds convincing for people not versed in the matter. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 03:52:05PM -0400, grarpamp wrote: If Torproject ending it's close ties w/ U.S. military funding (by some means) isn't important for it's reputation appearance to the broader internet community, I'm not sure what is. The code is open for inspection so it's not an overt issue, and the cash funds a lot of good research. Outright bribery or force here's a million or an NSL/order, don't implement this, has a reasonably good chance of resulting in a sitdown protest closure of the project. So the only issue I see is covert, here's a million, go research this (which might keep you too busy to discover or implement this other thing we don't like). Yes, the US is a curious home for tor in these regards. Yet moving it someplace else will have a different set of pressures (though probably lesser), a different set of donors, coders, etc. Ordinary people do not know this word code (especially open source). They believe that the piper calls the tune. And in fact it is very difficult to argue with such a statement without falling into the technical details (code is open) -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 6/16/14, Артур Истомин art.is...@yandex.ru wrote: On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 03:52:05PM -0400, grarpamp wrote: If Torproject ending it's close ties w/ U.S. military funding (by some means) isn't important for it's reputation appearance to the broader internet community, I'm not sure what is. The code is open for inspection so it's not an overt issue, and the cash funds a lot of good research. Outright bribery or force here's a million or an NSL/order, don't implement this, has a reasonably good chance of resulting in a sitdown protest closure of the project. So the only issue I see is covert, here's a million, go research this (which might keep you too busy to discover or implement this other thing we don't like). Yes, the US is a curious home for tor in these regards. Yet moving it someplace else will have a different set of pressures (though probably lesser), a different set of donors, coders, etc. Ordinary people do not know this word code (especially open source). They believe that the piper calls the tune. And in fact it is very difficult to argue with such a statement without falling into the technical details (code is open) What makes it blindingly obvious to me that Tor is not 0wned by NSA or USA CORP is Wikileaks. The helicopter gunship video (Manning), and many other Wikileaks leaks which have often resulted in Streisand effect (bankers shutting down local wikileaks and news outlets which referenced/talked about banking corruption) in a good way, are clear signals. Julian Assange under house arrest for how long now? Edward Snowden teaching The Guardian how to run a document drop-box on Tor, and he's now exiled under threat of a grand jury? The signals before us are clear, self evident and unambiguous. It's humorous to me: the government funding the Tor network which it uses for its spies to communicate safely, while at the same time is apparently busy trying to crack/ break the network to uncover other spies (or crims, whatever...). I think the question is in no way an open one - it's a shut case - Tor is not 0wned by NSA or USA government etc. Cheers Zenaan -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
Ordinary people do not know this word code (especially open source). They believe that the piper calls the tune. And in fact it is very difficult to argue with such a statement without falling into the technical details (code is open) code is open means NOTHING, so sorry - just look at OpenSSL. That open code is somehow safe is a completely false myth. It is very easy to insert bugs that result in huge security holes into any open code project and we have seen more than enough examples of this to keep wearing blinders and pretend that the code is available means that the code is safe. code is audited means a tiny bit more. I would really like to see some truly independent audit. Such an audit could (like Tor itself) be funded using cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin so that governments can not easily prevent donations. signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 09:00:24AM +0200, Öyvind Saether wrote: Ordinary people do not know this word code (especially open source). They believe that the piper calls the tune. And in fact it is very difficult to argue with such a statement without falling into the technical details (code is open) code is open means NOTHING, so sorry - just look at OpenSSL. That open code is somehow safe is a completely false myth. It is very easy to insert bugs that result in huge security holes into any open code project and we have seen more than enough examples of this to keep wearing blinders and pretend that the code is available means that the code is safe. Much easier insert backdoor into proprietary software. Even hide nothing/nowhere code is audited means a tiny bit more. I would really like to see some truly independent audit. Such an audit could (like Tor itself) be funded using cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin so that governments can not easily prevent donations. Agreed 100%. Today it is more important than auditing TrueCrypt. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
16.06.2014 03:59, Griffin Boyce: Sebastian G. bastik.tor wrote: Money is money; independent from the source. Money (especially donations to non-profits) are perceived to have politics attached to it. After Hurricane Katrina, there was a bit of an uproar after Kuwait offered to donate $400m in oil and $100m in actual money. My (limited) understanding is that Country X can use good deeds like those to try to rehabilitate their image, or use it to insinuate a political tie between themselves and the US. With some countries, these sanctions go away after a while, but with others it's a difficult situation long-term. Imagine if, to choose a totally random example, North Korea decided to give a billion dollars to anti-poverty charities while its people go hungry. Or if Lukashenko gave a few million to lobby for journalistic protections in the US while having an awful record domestically.[2] ~Griffin I didn't consider that. Morally questionable sources do have to be considered. It also has to be considered what the agenda is/was. Regards, Sebastian G. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 09:00:24 +0200 Öyvind Saether oyvi...@everdot.org wrote: Ordinary people do not know this word code (especially open source). They believe that the piper calls the tune. And in fact it is very difficult to argue with such a statement without falling into the technical details (code is open) code is open means NOTHING, so sorry - just look at OpenSSL. exactly. That open code is somehow safe is a completely false myth. It is very easy to insert bugs that result in huge security holes into any open code project and we have seen more than enough examples of this to keep wearing blinders and pretend that the code is available means that the code is safe. code is audited means a tiny bit more. I would really like to see some truly independent audit. Such an audit could (like Tor itself) be funded using cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin so that governments can not easily prevent donations. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 05:41:32 + Артур Истомин art.is...@yandex.ru wrote: Very true. In Russia, question do you know who funded torproject? (assuming US gov.) arises constantly in disputes about the safety of tor. It is a very stupid argument. Not at all. It is a perfectly rational line of reasoning. But with anti-American sentiment in mind, it sounds convincing for people not versed in the matter. ´anti american sentiment´ is a rational response to the actions of the US government and its supporters. If you are not revolted by the criminal actions of these sick animals., then there´s something wrong with your moral sentiments. I take it that you as a russian dont trust your own government. And that ´anti russian sentiment´ is rational. However distrusting the russian governmet while trusting the american government is...a pretty bad idea. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:17:44 -0500 Joe Btfsplk joebtfs...@gmx.com wrote: On 6/15/2014 2:08 PM, Mirimir wrote: It was OK for the founding fathers to be extreme militants, but no one can do it after that, or they'll go to jail. I'm not saying Tor Project (by themselves) should start a revolution over embargo laws. The tor project is an establishment project. The last thing they want is a ´revolution´ Of course, members of this mailing list like to parade as freedom fighters, but they are only fooling people who want to be fooled. But that scenario is similar to historical cases (in some respects). Women couldn't vote; black people had to use different restrooms, water fountains. Ah yes. There were some problems for blacks in the american free society eh? And who caused the problems? Why, it seems the problems were caused by...the government, a ´legal entity´ that first enforced slavery till 1870 and then apartheid till the 1970s... And, go figure, that happens to be the same all loving government responsible for the department of war/´defense´ and responsible for spying projects like tor. I personally saw that growing up in the South. And how do things look like know in the good old US? No racism at all, or millions of brown people jailed perhaps? On all those things hundreds more, someone / some group had to stand up - do more than send an email, that can be deleted by a flunkie, for anything to change. As long as funding doesn't come with strings, there's no problem with accepting it. Very true - more so w/ people already using Tor or those that would never look at how Tor is funded. But if some sayings were ever true, it's, Perception is reality, and You're judged by the company you keep. People on the outside looking in, see an organization, whose primary purpose is to provide means to protect privacy, *especially* from gov't agencies, but the major portion of their funding comes FROM a gov't agency. Heres news for you : The primary purpose of the tor project is to spy on people who are not subservient to the american military. The US military can´t easily spy on internet traffic in places like, say, china or iran, because those countries are firewalled. So the US military needs something like tor. Also, tor is a way for the US military to monitor its own ´dissidents´. I'm sorry - but no matter how much I or anyone else loves Tor, to many thinking outsiders, it would appear quite fishy (if they know that funding fact). It just don't look right. I think it's fishy - _ I like Tor_. If I'd actually known that fact before I used it, I'd have thought something wasn't right. Yep. Something isn right. Hm. Or rather : some things (plural) aren´t right. It may be, if they really want to grow the Tor user base (continually), it may have to appeal to a broader audience, for many of whom the funding source issue may well be a stumbling block. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:43:06 + Артур Истомин art.is...@yandex.ru wrote: On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 09:00:24AM +0200, Öyvind Saether wrote: Ordinary people do not know this word code (especially open source). They believe that the piper calls the tune. And in fact it is very difficult to argue with such a statement without falling into the technical details (code is open) code is open means NOTHING, so sorry - just look at OpenSSL. That open code is somehow safe is a completely false myth. It is very easy to insert bugs that result in huge security holes into any open code project and we have seen more than enough examples of this to keep wearing blinders and pretend that the code is available means that the code is safe. Much easier insert backdoor into proprietary software. Even hide nothing/nowhere Irrelevant. The discussion isnt about closed vs open source. But since you mention it... people ´trust´ open source code more because it is allegedly harder to subvert. It may be harder. Or not. But at the end of the day, subverted open source code is as bad, or worse, than subverted closed source code. code is audited means a tiny bit more. I would really like to see some truly independent audit. Such an audit could (like Tor itself) be funded using cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin so that governments can not easily prevent donations. Agreed 100%. Today it is more important than auditing TrueCrypt. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 04:28:06PM -0300, Juan wrote: On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 05:41:32 + Артур Истомин art.is...@yandex.ru wrote: Very true. In Russia, question do you know who funded torproject? (assuming US gov.) arises constantly in disputes about the safety of tor. It is a very stupid argument. Not at all. It is a perfectly rational line of reasoning. But with anti-American sentiment in mind, it sounds convincing for people not versed in the matter. ´anti american sentiment´ is a rational response to the actions of the US government and its supporters. If you are not revolted by the criminal actions of these sick animals., then there´s something wrong with your moral sentiments. I take it that you as a russian dont trust your own government. And that ´anti russian sentiment´ is rational. However distrusting the russian governmet while trusting the american government is...a pretty bad idea. Anti-American sentiment in Russia - 50% propaganda. Both govs are sick animals IMO. I don't trust any of them. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 04:26:43PM -0300, Juan wrote: On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:43:06 + Артур Истомин art.is...@yandex.ru wrote: On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 09:00:24AM +0200, Öyvind Saether wrote: Ordinary people do not know this word code (especially open source). They believe that the piper calls the tune. And in fact it is very difficult to argue with such a statement without falling into the technical details (code is open) code is open means NOTHING, so sorry - just look at OpenSSL. That open code is somehow safe is a completely false myth. It is very easy to insert bugs that result in huge security holes into any open code project and we have seen more than enough examples of this to keep wearing blinders and pretend that the code is available means that the code is safe. Much easier insert backdoor into proprietary software. Even hide nothing/nowhere Irrelevant. The discussion isnt about closed vs open source. That open code is somehow safe is a completely false myth... How is it irrelevant? But since you mention it... people ´trust´ open source code more because it is allegedly harder to subvert. It may be harder. Or not. But at the end of the day, subverted open source code is as bad, or worse, than subverted closed source code. empty words code is audited means a tiny bit more. I would really like to see some truly independent audit. Such an audit could (like Tor itself) be funded using cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin so that governments can not easily prevent donations. Agreed 100%. Today it is more important than auditing TrueCrypt. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 6/17/14, Juan juan@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 05:41:32 + Артур Истомин art.is...@yandex.ru wrote: Very true. In Russia, question do you know who funded torproject? (assuming US gov.) arises constantly in disputes about the safety of tor. It is a very stupid argument. Not at all. It is a perfectly rational line of reasoning. But with anti-American sentiment in mind, it sounds convincing for people not versed in the matter. ´anti american sentiment´ is a rational response to the actions of the US government and its supporters. If you are not revolted by the criminal actions of these sick animals., then there´s something wrong with your moral sentiments. I take it that you as a russian dont trust your own government. And that ´anti russian sentiment´ is rational. However distrusting the russian governmet while trusting the american government is...a pretty bad idea. Thank you. Rational truth, without emotional flames. Really appreciated, Zenaan -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 6/17/14, Juan juan@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:17:44 -0500 Joe Btfsplk joebtfs...@gmx.com wrote: People on the outside looking in, see an organization, whose primary purpose is to provide means to protect privacy, *especially* from gov't agencies, but the major portion of their funding comes FROM a gov't agency. Heres news for you : The primary purpose of the tor project is to spy on people who are not subservient to the american military. The US military can´t easily spy on internet traffic in places like, say, china or iran, because those countries are firewalled. So the US military needs something like tor. Also, tor is a way for the US military to monitor its own ´dissidents´. May be so, but I remember reading an NSA slide from Snowden's leaks showing their intent to break TOR, and some problems they faced in doing so. So Tor provides (of necessity I guess, to work to break the great firewall etc) some level of genuine facility - it is a useful tool for dissidents as much as for grouping dissidents into use of one tool. There ARE individuals around the planet who say I don't have to be doing anything wrong to want my privacy. Use of tools to enhance privacy/ anonymity, does not imply that you are doing anything wrong, and may imply that you are a strong supporter of human rights. Ie, we could say PGP is a way for the US military to monitor its own ´dissidents´ yet that flies in the face of the arms export block that was fought so hard against by Phil Zimmerman. Not all is as simple as it first may appear. Zenaan -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Andrew Lewman and...@torproject.is wrote: - Looked into legality of receiving a large financial donation from a country on the US Treasury embargoed list. Unsurprisingly, we cannot accept such a donation due to the source. It's the law in the USA. Regardless of how one feels about it, it's currently against the law. The citizen resided in a country as listed as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Sponsors_of_Terrorism According to the advice we received, financial transaction is defined broadly to encompass many things, possibly including bitcoins/dogecoins/and other coins. There are many battles Tor can fight, this is not one of them. Andrew pgp 0x6B4D6475 I would totally agree. If an incorporation wants to keep its status you don't knowingly mess with the Sponsors or Persons lists. And this would be donor made their origin observable, so that is clearly off the table and tpo must deny their gracious generosity. (With much love to Iranian friends of Tor, et al). TorProject appears to currently accept (via Bitpay) donations of up to under $10,000USD worth of BTC. https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate.html.en There are also other non-US entities listed on that page which can accept donations, including BTC. There is a liberation-tech mailing list which may be of interest/consult. As well as all sorts of other international periphery groups. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 6/14/2014 10:40 PM, Andrew Lewman wrote: On 06/14/2014 03:21 AM, Sebastian G. bastik.tor wrote: That has to be a violation of your rights. It's the law in the USA. Regardless of how one feels about it, it's currently against the law. The citizen resided in a country as listed as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Sponsors_of_Terrorism According to the advice we received, financial transaction is defined broadly to encompass many things, possibly including bitcoins/dogecoins/and other coins. There are many battles Tor can fight, this is not one of them. I wouldn't expect any one or small group to just jump in defy the current interpretation of embargo laws - without serious research consideration. I haven't read the statutes covering any sort of transaction between a US non-profit a private citizen in an embargoed country I may not - depending. Where such a transaction would not benefit the country, or even the private donor, in any financial, military, political manner, etc.; only promoting access to free speech information, which in all likely hood, could lead to citizens *forcing change* on the very policies / actions, that lead to the country being embargoed in the first place. Forbiding this specific transaction, given the specific circumstances, would seem to be the definition of cutting off one's nose to spite their face. In the world US history, there are 1000's of cases where something was once entrenched as being illegal, but became legal, often because someone stood up fought to change it. If Torproject ending it's close ties w/ U.S. military funding (by some means) isn't important for it's reputation appearance to the broader internet community, I'm not sure what is. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 06/15/2014 10:03 AM, Joe Btfsplk wrote: On 6/14/2014 10:40 PM, Andrew Lewman wrote: On 06/14/2014 03:21 AM, Sebastian G. bastik.tor wrote: That has to be a violation of your rights. It's the law in the USA. Regardless of how one feels about it, it's currently against the law. The citizen resided in a country as listed as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Sponsors_of_Terrorism According to the advice we received, financial transaction is defined broadly to encompass many things, possibly including bitcoins/dogecoins/and other coins. There are many battles Tor can fight, this is not one of them. I wouldn't expect any one or small group to just jump in defy the current interpretation of embargo laws - without serious research consideration. I totally agree, there's no reason to defy anything, unless creating a test case for litigation is the goal. SNIP Where such a transaction would not benefit the country, or even the private donor, in any financial, military, political manner, etc.; only promoting access to free speech information, which in all likely hood, could lead to citizens *forcing change* on the very policies / actions, that lead to the country being embargoed in the first place. Forbiding this specific transaction, given the specific circumstances, would seem to be the definition of cutting off one's nose to spite their face. The law is the law, and (acting openly) the choices are compliance, or noncompliance on principle. But see above. In the world US history, there are 1000's of cases where something was once entrenched as being illegal, but became legal, often because someone stood up fought to change it. Indeed! Exemptions for victims and freedom fighters from designations as State Sponsor of Terrorism would make sense. After all, the US has itself supported freedom fighters in Iran, during the 2009-2010 election. If Torproject ending it's close ties w/ U.S. military funding (by some means) isn't important for it's reputation appearance to the broader internet community, I'm not sure what is. As long as funding doesn't come with strings, there's no problem with accepting it. As I see this case, the prospective donor was foolish to contact the Tor Project directly, apparently with no effective anonymity. And whoever publicized this screwup was also foolish. After explaining the situation to said prospective donor, the Tor Project should have discretely mentioned the donor's intent and contact information through suitable channels. And then they should have forgotten about it all. As I said, the less said, the better. But maybe I was too enigmatic ;) -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Joe Btfsplk joebtfs...@gmx.com wrote: Where such a transaction would not benefit the country, or even the private donor, in any financial, military, political manner, etc.; only promoting access to free speech information, which in all likely hood, could lead to citizens *forcing change* on the very policies / actions, that lead to the country being embargoed in the first place. Yes, and tor going through its contacts at the state department might be useful in attempting to secure permission on those grounds. Even draining Sponsors non-directed funds could be seen as generically helping tor, which could help Sponsor say, hack the US. Same if Sponsor directs funds for better obfs, etc. And countries hacking each other is top political speak these days. So if you knowingly go accept Sponsors funds without a letter of permission, you better be ready to defend yourself against closure of your entity. (Which currently pays the wages for a handful of people [with strong beliefs in the entity, etc] so taking a pill that could kill you would not be easy.) That said, tor is BSD licensed so it would still be around. But who would be able to carry it the same or better. I wouldn't expect any one or small group to just jump in defy the current interpretation of embargo laws - without serious research consideration. Depends a lot on if the donation amount is significant, and/or if you're in it just to fight it. If Torproject ending it's close ties w/ U.S. military funding (by some means) isn't important for it's reputation appearance to the broader internet community, I'm not sure what is. The code is open for inspection so it's not an overt issue, and the cash funds a lot of good research. Outright bribery or force here's a million or an NSL/order, don't implement this, has a reasonably good chance of resulting in a sitdown protest closure of the project. So the only issue I see is covert, here's a million, go research this (which might keep you too busy to discover or implement this other thing we don't like). Yes, the US is a curious home for tor in these regards. Yet moving it someplace else will have a different set of pressures (though probably lesser), a different set of donors, coders, etc. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 6/15/2014 2:08 PM, Mirimir wrote: The law is the law, and (acting openly) the choices are compliance, or noncompliance on principle. But see above. No, the law is often temporary, until someone has the guts to stand up (100's, maybe 1000's of times, in the last 150 yrs, in U.S. alone). This many countries were founded entirely on standing up against repression; by revolutionists. Hell, in the U.S., we celebrate honor revolutionists - of the most extreme kind - every 4th of July. Politicians give speeches all over the U.S., about how great the revolutionary militants were. But then somehow, if in current day, people talk about changing the status quo - for really important issues, like civil rights, they're branded militants that need to be silenced by any means necessary. It was OK for the founding fathers to be extreme militants, but no one can do it after that, or they'll go to jail. I'm not saying Tor Project (by themselves) should start a revolution over embargo laws. But that scenario is similar to historical cases (in some respects). Women couldn't vote; black people had to use different restrooms, water fountains. I personally saw that growing up in the South. On all those things hundreds more, someone / some group had to stand up - do more than send an email, that can be deleted by a flunkie, for anything to change. As long as funding doesn't come with strings, there's no problem with accepting it. Very true - more so w/ people already using Tor or those that would never look at how Tor is funded. But if some sayings were ever true, it's, Perception is reality, and You're judged by the company you keep. People on the outside looking in, see an organization, whose primary purpose is to provide means to protect privacy, *especially* from gov't agencies, but the major portion of their funding comes FROM a gov't agency. I'm sorry - but no matter how much I or anyone else loves Tor, to many thinking outsiders, it would appear quite fishy (if they know that funding fact). It just don't look right. I think it's fishy - _ I like Tor_. If I'd actually known that fact before I used it, I'd have thought something wasn't right. It may be, if they really want to grow the Tor user base (continually), it may have to appeal to a broader audience, for many of whom the funding source issue may well be a stumbling block. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014, at 10:17 PM, Joe Btfsplk wrote: But if some sayings were ever true, it's, Perception is reality, err, no it isn't. Maybe on the quantum level. GD -- http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
Sebastian G. bastik.tor wrote: Andrew wrote: - Looked into legality of receiving a large financial donation from a country on the US Treasury embargoed list. Unsurprisingly, we cannot accept such a donation due to the source. Money is speech, isn't it? It's just a promise.* If that is true, then preventing you from taking money is a violation of your first amendment. Well, sort of. In campaign finance law, money is speech, but America hasn't quite figured out how these laws complement or conflict. And there's a standing list of embargoed countries.[1] It's an incredibly tricky legal area. (I've ~really~ got to start reading tor-reports more often) [3] Money is money; independent from the source. Money (especially donations to non-profits) are perceived to have politics attached to it. After Hurricane Katrina, there was a bit of an uproar after Kuwait offered to donate $400m in oil and $100m in actual money. My (limited) understanding is that Country X can use good deeds like those to try to rehabilitate their image, or use it to insinuate a political tie between themselves and the US. With some countries, these sanctions go away after a while, but with others it's a difficult situation long-term. Imagine if, to choose a totally random example, North Korea decided to give a billion dollars to anti-poverty charities while its people go hungry. Or if Lukashenko gave a few million to lobby for journalistic protections in the US while having an awful record domestically.[2] ~Griffin [1] http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Pages/Programs.aspx [2] https://www.cpj.org/europe/belarus/ [3] that awkward moment when you're reading someone's funder report and it has your name in it. surprise! -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 06/15/2014 12:50 AM, krishna e bera wrote: What about forming an international consortium to shepherd Tor, so that developments can come from and be funded in multiple jurisdictions? This would also remove some of the odour that any US-based project emits on international and virtual streets. The Wau Holland Foundation in Germany accepts money for Tor. It is also mentioned here: https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate.html.en#cash -- Moritz Bartl https://www.torservers.net/ -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
Mirimir: On 06/14/2014 01:21 AM, Sebastian G. bastik.tor wrote: If payed contribution is ruled out for that donor (whoever that is), because of its country how could the money get to you? Maybe the donor gives it to some middle-man that is not on the blacklist. The middle-man then transfers the money to you. (This has to be legal, because that is done with weapons as well. Countries not allowed to sell weapons to some country, sell it to their friendly surrounding countries and the weapons end up where they were wanted in the first place.) Bitcoins? I think to complex at times. Something like that would probably actually work. Now I hold it with your last part of your message. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 6/14/2014 2:21 AM, Sebastian G. bastik.tor wrote: Andrew wrote: # Highlights (...) - Looked into legality of receiving a large financial donation from a country on the US Treasury embargoed list. Unsurprisingly, we cannot accept such a donation due to the source. That has to be a violation of your rights. Whatever country gives you money in form of an donation should be perfectly fine. You are not doing business with them, they give you the money an that's it. (Otherwise it wouldn't be a donation. If I demand something specific for the money it is no longer a donation, it becomes sponsorship or a business relationship.) It totally depends on how laws are worded, concerning any all interactions with embargoed countries. Maybe there's a clause that covers actions like this. I'm not a legal or embargo rules expert, but I wonder if an embargoed country or individuals in it, giving money to a non-profit for which they receive nothing valuable, or that benefits the country financially, militarily or politically, actually violates the spirit of embargo laws. I'm not sure the intent of embargo laws is to stifle free speech or access to information outside of a repressive gov't. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Joe Btfsplk joebtfs...@gmx.com wrote: I'm not a legal or embargo rules expert, but I wonder if an embargoed country or individuals in it, giving money to a non-profit for which they receive nothing valuable, or that benefits the country financially, militarily or politically, actually violates the spirit of embargo laws. Not only the spirit but the actual law. I would not touch the money no matter how substantial. -- *Collin David Anderson* averysmallbird.com | @cda | Washington, D.C. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 14-06-14 01:00 PM, Collin Anderson wrote: On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Joe Btfsplk joebtfs...@gmx.com wrote: I'm not a legal or embargo rules expert, but I wonder if an embargoed country or individuals in it, giving money to a non-profit for which they receive nothing valuable, or that benefits the country financially, militarily or politically, actually violates the spirit of embargo laws. Not only the spirit but the actual law. I would not touch the money no matter how substantial. When exporting crypto from USA was illegal, the FreeS/WAN project moved all development to countries with less repressive regimes[0]. That was fine for a civilian-funded effort but perhaps wont work well for Tor Project. What about forming an international consortium to shepherd Tor, so that developments can come from and be funded in multiple jurisdictions? This would also remove some of the odour that any US-based project emits on international and virtual streets. [0] http://www.freeswan.org/freeswan_trees/freeswan-1.5/doc/exportlaws.html -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 6/14/2014 5:50 PM, krishna e bera wrote: On 14-06-14 01:00 PM, Collin Anderson wrote: On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Joe Btfsplk joebtfs...@gmx.com wrote: I'm not a legal or embargo rules expert, but I wonder if an embargoed country or individuals in it, giving money to a non-profit for which they receive nothing valuable, or that benefits the country financially, militarily or politically, actually violates the spirit of embargo laws. Not only the spirit but the actual law. I would not touch the money no matter how substantial. When exporting crypto from USA was illegal, the FreeS/WAN project moved all development to countries with less repressive regimes[0]. That was fine for a civilian-funded effort but perhaps wont work well for Tor Project. What about forming an international consortium to shepherd Tor, so that developments can come from and be funded in multiple jurisdictions? This would also remove some of the odour that any US-based project emits on international and virtual streets. [0] http://www.freeswan.org/freeswan_trees/freeswan-1.5/doc/exportlaws.html Nah, that would make too much sense. When politicians want to take illegal contributions or gifts, they find a way around rules have done so for 1000's of yrs. According to some reports, Google has been the 2nd largest spender on Capitol Hill, for the last 2? yrs. They get what they want (usually) do what they want, because of handing out free pens to Congress. It's OK for an organization dedicated to providing anonymity to protect users - everywhere, in no small part from various gov't agencies, to take major funding from... a gov't agency. Yet, that organization can't take *private* donations from a country w/ embargo restrictions. Don't make no sense, Jethro. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 06/14/2014 06:29 PM, Joe Btfsplk wrote: SNIP It's OK for an organization dedicated to providing anonymity to protect users - everywhere, in no small part from various gov't agencies, to take major funding from... a gov't agency. Yet, that organization can't take *private* donations from a country w/ embargo restrictions. Don't make no sense, Jethro. Anyone can accept private donations from anyone else, as long as the donor remains anonymous. What's so odd about the Tor Project accepting anonymous donations? If donors remain anonymous, how can there be any strings attached to the donations? -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 06/14/2014 03:21 AM, Sebastian G. bastik.tor wrote: That has to be a violation of your rights. It's the law in the USA. Regardless of how one feels about it, it's currently against the law. The citizen resided in a country as listed as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Sponsors_of_Terrorism According to the advice we received, financial transaction is defined broadly to encompass many things, possibly including bitcoins/dogecoins/and other coins. There are many battles Tor can fight, this is not one of them. -- Andrew pgp 0x6B4D6475 https://www.torproject.org/ +1-781-948-1982 -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 6/14/2014 7:56 PM, Mirimir wrote: On 06/14/2014 06:29 PM, Joe Btfsplk wrote: SNIP It's OK for an organization dedicated to providing anonymity to protect users - everywhere, in no small part from various gov't agencies, to take major funding from... a gov't agency. Yet, that organization can't take *private* donations from a country w/ embargo restrictions. Don't make no sense, Jethro. Anyone can accept private donations from anyone else, as long as the donor remains anonymous. What's so odd about the Tor Project accepting anonymous donations? If donors remain anonymous, how can there be any strings attached to the donations? Nothing is so odd about private donations. You misread or misinterpreted my post. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 06/14/2014 09:42 PM, Joe Btfsplk wrote: On 6/14/2014 7:56 PM, Mirimir wrote: On 06/14/2014 06:29 PM, Joe Btfsplk wrote: SNIP It's OK for an organization dedicated to providing anonymity to protect users - everywhere, in no small part from various gov't agencies, to take major funding from... a gov't agency. Yet, that organization can't take *private* donations from a country w/ embargo restrictions. Don't make no sense, Jethro. Anyone can accept private donations from anyone else, as long as the donor remains anonymous. What's so odd about the Tor Project accepting anonymous donations? If donors remain anonymous, how can there be any strings attached to the donations? Nothing is so odd about private donations. You misread or misinterpreted my post. I was agreeing with you. Sorry that I didn't make that clear. -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations
On 06/14/2014 09:40 PM, Andrew Lewman wrote: On 06/14/2014 03:21 AM, Sebastian G. bastik.tor wrote: That has to be a violation of your rights. It's the law in the USA. Regardless of how one feels about it, it's currently against the law. The citizen resided in a country as listed as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Sponsors_of_Terrorism Maybe said citizen is a victim of said state. According to the advice we received, financial transaction is defined broadly to encompass many things, possibly including bitcoins/dogecoins/and other coins. There are many battles Tor can fight, this is not one of them. Leaving aside this particular case, are you saying that the Tor Project does not accept donations in Bitcoins? That would be very funny ;) -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
