librelist archives

« back to archive

Lantern anti-censorship tool

Lantern anti-censorship tool

From:
David Burns
Date:
2014-08-14 @ 20:32
https://github.com/getlantern/lantern/wiki/Questions-and-Answers

I had not heard about lantern until today. My impression is it is tor
without security. It just gives people a way to access blocked sites, and
the blocked sites have to be on a list. It sounds like a potential security
nightmare. The only obvious advantage versus tor would be speed?  Hmmm...

Anyone know about this project and have an opinion?
Dave

Re: [redecentralize] Lantern anti-censorship tool

From:
Virgil Griffith
Date:
2014-08-14 @ 21:19
In some jurisdictions circumventing the block is rarely persecuted.
 Therefore presumably Lantern is intended for that use case.

-V

On Thursday, August 14, 2014, David Burns <tdbtdb@gmail.com> wrote:

> https://github.com/getlantern/lantern/wiki/Questions-and-Answers
>
> I had not heard about lantern until today. My impression is it is tor
> without security. It just gives people a way to access blocked sites, and
> the blocked sites have to be on a list. It sounds like a potential security
> nightmare. The only obvious advantage versus tor would be speed?  Hmmm...
>
> Anyone know about this project and have an opinion?
> Dave
>

Re: [redecentralize] Lantern anti-censorship tool

From:
Adam Ierymenko
Date:
2014-08-14 @ 21:28
Virgil!?!?!

> On Aug 14, 2014, at 2:19 PM, Virgil Griffith <i@virgil.gr> wrote:
> 
> In some jurisdictions circumventing the block is rarely persecuted.  
Therefore presumably Lantern is intended for that use case.
> 
> -V
> 
>> On Thursday, August 14, 2014, David Burns <tdbtdb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> https://github.com/getlantern/lantern/wiki/Questions-and-Answers
>> 
>> I had not heard about lantern until today. My impression is it is tor 
without security. It just gives people a way to access blocked sites, and 
the blocked sites have to be on a list. It sounds like a potential 
security nightmare. The only obvious advantage versus tor would be speed?
Hmmm...
>> 
>> Anyone know about this project and have an opinion?
>> Dave

Re: [redecentralize] Lantern anti-censorship tool

From:
Daniel Maher
Date:
2014-08-18 @ 12:45
On 14/08/14 22:32, David Burns wrote:
> https://github.com/getlantern/lantern/wiki/Questions-and-Answers
> 
> I had not heard about lantern until today. My impression is it is tor
> without security. It just gives people a way to access blocked sites,
> and the blocked sites have to be on a list. It sounds like a potential
> security nightmare. The only obvious advantage versus tor would be
> speed?  Hmmm...

There are certainly parallels with Tor, but with the addition of a
Freenet-style in the "friends" mode, whereby your traffic is routed
through a web of trust.

The stated goal is fairly plain: to help users in restrictive locales to
access some known-censored content, and to do so through trusted nodes
only.  In principle there's nothing wrong with this model, and the
software may indeed achieve that goal (given critical enough mass).  The
fact that it is unapologetically non-anonymous would be troublesome in
any other context, but generally speaking, a web of trust requires some
diminished anonymity anyway, so I can see why they've just chosen to
abandon any pre-text to such altogether.

That it only proxies a pre-defined set of sites is an interesting
element in the equation.  It fits well within the narrow scope of their
stated goal, but I worry about the content of that list - in particular,
who manages it exactly?  It would appear that there is an ironic
opportunity for censorship at this layer. :/

-- 
dan (phrawzty).
devops; mozilla.