Internal irc-log of the tor-project reveals debate about hiring an ex-CIA agent
The ridiculous thing about this, if accurate, is that Tor was (is?) primarily funded by an organization connected to State and CIA propaganda efforts. Most of them receive money from US governmemt in sone way. CIA itself uses Tor for same reason Navy created it. While FBI and NSA hate it, the CIA and State love it as a tool for protecting foreign operators or dissenters. Makes it funny they&#x27;re so worried about bringing CIA in.<p>Anyway, the right way go do security against nation-states is creating deliverables and processes that are verified by mutually-suspicious parties. As in, with high-assurance security, you assume the people are largely malicious while focusing on vetting thd product and process throughout lifecycle. Not sure what this CIA person&#x27;s role is supposed to be but it&#x27;s bad INFOSEC and OPSEC if he can unilaterally do lots of damage. Shouldn&#x27;t be possible.<p>Far as image, just like my subversion-resistant build scheme, having helpful CIA rep onboard as a check American government can trust is beneficial at least for <i>review and testing</i>. Have one from each major government or institution using the service acting as checks against inserted or ignored subversions. Plus non-government groups of course. That one CIA guy can compromise either service or image again makes process or trust assessment look weak.<p>I say let them come onboard but with non-critical access and any actions reviewed. Even if failure, it would teach important lessons.