[Tahoe-LAFS] #1010: anonymous client mode

[Zooko Wilcox]

Thanks for bringing this up, David! I think that the word "anonymous" is
problematic, both in general and in the case.

One reason it is problematic is, as you say, that it is technically
inaccurate. Preventing your peers, or certain network eavesdroppers, from
linking your network traffic to your IP address is neither necessary nor
sufficient for preventing them from linking your network traffic to your
name.

Also, sometimes you want people to be able to link your name, but not your
IP address! I believe that mode of privacy will turn out to be the most
important one in the future.

For a simple example, imagine that you are a whistleblower or a government
witness in a mafia case, and everyone knows your name, but when you
exchange emails or give video testimony, you need to protect your IP
address. It is confusing and wrong to call this "anonymous".

The other reason it is problematic is that "anonymous" is a jargon word
which means one thing to computer scientists and something related but
different to the other 99.9% of English speakers.

To computer scientists, it means "unlinks two things (one of which is
typically your IP address)" and it is morally neutral. To speakers of
English, it means "without any name attached", and it comes with a strong
connotation of menace, shame, or crime.

It's a terrible, terrible strategy to insist on using this technically
inaccurate jargon word, thereby both confusing *and* frightening away
potential users and supporters.

Just replace "anonymous" with "private" now and get this over with.

Sincerely,

Zooko

On Mar 31, 2016 03:03, "Tahoe-LAFS" <trac at tahoe-lafs.org> wrote:

>

> #1010: anonymous client mode
>
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
>      Reporter:  duck     |      Owner:  warner
>          Type:           |     Status:  new
>   enhancement            |
>      Priority:  minor    |  Milestone:  1.12.0
>     Component:  code-    |    Version:  1.6.1
>   network                |   Keywords:  privacy anonymity docs anti-
>    Resolution:           |  censorship forward-compatibility i2p-collab
i2p
> Launchpad Bug:           |  tor-protocol
>
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
>
> Comment (by dawuud):
>
>  In various conversations and tickets Leif and Zooko both point out that
>  our language is misleading because in this case the word "anonymous"
>  doesn't mean unlinkable identity from the storage server's perspective at
>  all... but merely means that our origin IP is hidden via the network
>  transport. This is arguably not anonymity at all. It is important to make
>  this distinction I think.
>
>  Question: Do any you have suggestions for how to make this explicitly
>  clear to the user? Should we change the name of the configuration option
>  to something else?
>
> --
> Ticket URL: <https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1010#comment:61
>
> Tahoe-LAFS <https://Tahoe-LAFS.org>
> secure decentralized storage
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/attachments/20160830/fb752829/attachment.html>