this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2025
77 points (100.0% liked)
Slop.
749 readers
449 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm going to do my best to give a good-faith answer to why TOR isn't the answer it seems to be. Leftists should understand the limitations of the technology we use so we can properly adjust our own personal security postures.
Content moderation is difficult to impossible with TOR
A TOR instance would be very difficult (if not impossible) to moderate while keeping its users safe. By design you can't block a troll by IP; 4chan runs into this problem constantly. If you force users to register with email then all security will be compromised for both the user and server when it sends out emails over the clearnet, to say nothing if the server is compromised. AFAIK no email provider will accept an email sent through TOR.
Even if the Onion instance(s) didn't care about moderation (like the original ranter wants), other instances will care about the griefing and spam, driving them to defederate with the Onion instance(s).
Old members of ~~chapo.chat~~ Hexbear will remember several attempts to flood this site with all kinds of trash, or the great purge of transphobes. Content moderation is the key to keeping us from becoming another cesspool or falling offline. Ironically the *chans have similar moderation for the exact same reason.
Technological security can be undermined shockingly easily with one mistake
For the sake of argument, and to steelman your position, lets pretend the above are solved. One huge danger of technological security is it gives many a false sense of their own security. Look at the recent Young Republican leaks, or really any leak from far right types. All of Signalgate was because a journalist was accidentally invited into the chat. Basic social engineering often gets the goods.
Most busts of by the feds are human factors, like a lapse in security or reusing an email. Powers-that-be can also find and go after the admins, which can compromise the site no matter the technological security. The Feds cracked LulzSec by a slip-up from Sabu and from there dismantled the whole group from the inside.
The breadth of the raids on LulzSec suspects and hardware across the world should give everybody pause from a security standpoint.
I haven't even covered securing the server from hackers.
Conclusion
At the end of the day, Lemmy is designed to get us out from under Corporate control, just like phpbb forums back in the day. Being a Person of Interest by nation-states is a completely different beast. Everybody should read Diary of a Person of Interest to see just how much power the Five Eyes can put on you.
I hate being the debbie-downer. I do wish we could build more secure software to protect people, but I want to keep people safe by giving a realistic view of the technological limitations. With the limitations in mind people can adjust their own security posture to mitigate the issues above for themselves.
Look, I appreciate you trying but this really isn't a takedown.
It's nothing personal but I'm not gonna respond after this. I'm really getting tired of being pulled into
after
by folks who are just repeating what other people told them. If you folks have not at the very least, run your own hidden service, you are not equipped to be lecturing or debating people on TOR.