Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!reader5.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?J=C3=B6rg_Lorenz?= Newsgroups: alt.comp.software.firefox Subject: Re: Tor Browser User Survey Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 18:37:30 +0200 Organization: Camembert Normand au Lait Cru Message-ID: References: <20250415.234434.f92ddeb9@yamn.paranoici.org> <9h2uvj1kcibpeldjp0c128codk1u8aiqa1@4ax.com> <86ikn44659.fsf@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 16:37:30 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: solani.org; logging-data="148649"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@news.solani.org" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:128.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/128.9.1 Cancel-Lock: sha1:0nIiPxEsAfNIROtUsqxKY6/OSHg= X-User-ID: eJwFwYkRwDAIA7CVCI9Jx3HgvP8IlSpwMJ0oZKk0a9LGx9eLQ2unVKvB2ti9ySeDR5K9jvwBPqMR4g== In-Reply-To: <86ikn44659.fsf@example.com> Content-Language: de-CH, en-GB Xref: csiph.com alt.comp.software.firefox:13102 On 16.04.25 14:56, Richmond wrote: > "John C." writes: > >> IMO, using Tor provides a convenient red-flag for TLAs to begin keeping >> an eye on a person to see if they're using the browser for illicit >> reasons. I am likewise thoroughly convinced that it's transparent to >> such agencies and has always been so. > > In my opinion it is not much different from using a VPN, more convenient > perhaps as you don't have to find a provider and configure it. Agreed but the loss of speed is not acceptable under normal circumstances. > Here in the UK the government requires ISPs to keep a log of URLs > visited. There are many legitimate reasons why you might not want a > log, for example looking up mental health issues. DNS over HTTPS exists and your government is blind. -- "Ave! Morituri te salutant!"