[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <58DB1B68E62B9F448DF1A276B0886DF193036F45@EX2010.hammerofgod.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 17:00:41 +0000
From: "Thor (Hammer of God)" <thor@...merofgod.com>
To: "Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu" <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>, Travis Biehn
<tbiehn@...il.com>
Cc: "full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk" <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Tor anonymizing network Compromised by
French researchers
*Any* assumptions that presuppose security based on social affiliation need to be reconsidered.
t
>-----Original Message-----
>From: full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk [mailto:full-disclosure-
>bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk] On Behalf Of Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
>Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 9:32 AM
>To: Travis Biehn
>Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
>Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Tor anonymizing network Compromised by
>French researchers
>
>On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:53:02 EDT, Travis Biehn said:
>
>> So they put up a fake network, 'hacked' most of the nodes, and with
>> complete control of their dummy network they were able to figure out
>> traffic movement?
>>
>> This is news why?
>
>It's not news - it's *long* been known that Tor would be breakable if
>somebody pwned a sufficient percentage of the nodes. It's been regarded as
>a mostly theoretical attack, because the sort of people that run Tor have up to
>now been the paranoid type that tend to secure their systems better.
>
>The only part of *news* in it was this:
>
>"Researchers showed that one third of the nodes are vulnerable,"
>
>So maybe the "people who run Tor are more paranoid" assumption is flawed
>and needs to be reconsidered.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists