Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward.
From: "Jeffrey F. Bloss" <jbloss () tampabay rr com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:51:44 -0400
Michael Holstein <michael.holstein () csuohio edu> wrote: First, I'm a long time supporter of Tor and a staunch advocate of anonymity and privacy. I also believe your interpretation of the Internet is a bit... distorted. :)
We're not talking about authenticated websites here (perhaps I should have made that more clear), nor are we talking about using TOR, etc. for malicious purposes. For the purpose of this (largely theoretical) argument, I meant "publicly accessible, non-authenticated websites".
And you're trying to justify unrestricted access to those public places based on what amounts to a "discrimination" argument. A fallacious premise. Choosing to be anonymous isn't something you are, it's something you do. A conscious choice, not an unavoidable consequence of your state of being like race/color or sexual orientation. Consequently, it's a quality that has no moral or legal protection. Operators of public places certainly *do* have the right to regulate access based on the conscious choices their prospective patrons. A restaurant, for example, can restrict access with an arbitrary dress code along the lines of "suit and tie". They can even enforce that policy according to time of day if they wish. Operating a "public access" entity doesn't mean you abdicate all your rights to limit access, it only means you're obligated to not limit access based on certain criteria. You still have every right to set non-discriminatory standards, and enforce them as you see fit as long as the practice doesn't breach the rights of your patrons. Now what beside a clothing choice, is Tor? :) -- Hand Crafted on Fri. Jun 09, 2006 at 13:27 Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. -- Groucho Marx _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward., (continued)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Michael Holstein (Jun 09)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Rodrigo Barbosa (Jun 09)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Michael Holstein (Jun 09)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Micheal Espinola Jr (Jun 09)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Michael Holstein (Jun 09)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Micheal Espinola Jr (Jun 09)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Rodrigo Barbosa (Jun 09)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Cardoso (Jun 09)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Mike Owen (Jun 09)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Ducki3 (Jun 09)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Jeffrey F. Bloss (Jun 09)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Eliah Kagan (Jun 10)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Eliah Kagan (Jun 10)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Rodrigo Barbosa (Jun 10)
- Re: Re: blocking tor is not the right way forward. It may just be the right way backward. Eliah Kagan (Jun 10)