• jetA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    The video covers that as well, if your bridge becomes discovered later, log traffic can be used to identify your tour usage in the past. And if that’s not acceptable in your threat model, then a VPN still makes sense

    • Saki@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agreed. It’s an option worth considering (even EFF said so)—in fact a bridge itself could be run by something like Team Cymru (Augury), removed in TB v11.5.4. On the other hand, a VPN could collaborate with “them” so you’ll have to trust them… adding yet another unknown.

      There are many ways to de-anonymoze Tor users indeed. Like Keystroke fingerprinting or Deep Packet Inspection… Usually a local ISP is not a big problem but it depends. The fact remains that even in a country with heavy Internet censorship, currently a nation-state can’t block Tor (via Bridge or Snowflake).

      • jetA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The issue of people in oppressive countries, where internet traffic is logged, is that using Tor won’t be blocked, but will mark somebody as a person of interest.

        So there’s a lot of people on this planet who are connected to the internet and have a legal requirement to have their traffic logged. Those people absolutely should be using a VPN, the VPN cannot possibly be worse than their ISP

        • Gooey0210@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I believe this is why privacy groups mostly recommend using tor without vpns More users, more traffic, less being a single target in a field