[kwlug-disc] netalyzr/ispgeeks interpreting [was: Re: Reliable Broadband speed test]

[Kyle Spaans]

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 6:54 PM, unsolicited <unsolicited at swiz.ca> wrote:
> Not too sure running encrypted through tor is all that different than
> running encrypted not through TOR. The anonymous bit torrent weanies claim
> you're only safe with them - as ISPs now have stuff to decrypt your VPN and
> see what you're really doing.

I haven't looked at it very closely, but my guess would be that they
are doing some tunneling magic so that it's not immediately obvious to
your ISP that you've got BT running. BT is identifiable in two
respects: 1) If unencrypted, you can see the protocol 2) The network
usage patterns. I'm pretty sure most decent BT clients will mask both
of these somehow. The anony-weenies probably do it slightly better?

> I don't believe it - they could prove traffic
> to a web site, but not the nature or specifics of the traffic.

Yes, the world would be doomed if someone as small as an ISP could
break SSL whenever they want. :P

> My impression here of tor is less the anonymity of it than access. I'm
> thinking of China restricted sites to its citizens (Tibet), Egypt, and those
> that tried to shut down the internet pre-Egypt.

True, they are constantly updating Tor to get around the restrictions
that China is putting on their citizens. See "Tor Bridge Node" if you
are curious. They are both central to the goals of the Tor Project.
(And both pretty big research areas.)