Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 11, 2025 10:37 UTC (Tue) by paulj (subscriber, #341)
In reply to: Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity by pizza
Parent article: Debian to require Rust as of May 2026

We're agreed there is rising illiberalism across the world, notably in previously liberal, western democracies. I would view the ever restrictive laws on anonymity, the ever greater control our states have as a problem - given how this can be abused. The rising illiberality makes it a pressing problem.

To fight illiberalism requires the ability to associate. To fight illiberalism in a state that is willing to use the tools of control against opponents (as has now happened in a number of western "liberal democracies", against dissident motivations across the spectrum - it's not a question of left or right) requires the ability to associate anonymously (at least, anonymous to outsiders). Effective association requires some anonymity in communication, and in acquiring and distributing resources.

To object to such tools because "Lolwut? govs wont like it bruv" is simply not an argument worth considering.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 11, 2025 12:38 UTC (Tue) by malmedal (subscriber, #56172) [Link] (15 responses)

> requires the ability to associate anonymously

No, anonymity is helpful if you want to subvert a democracy. Crypto is helpful for paying agitators in a deniable way(e.g. where does Tommy Robinson get money for his luxury vacations?)

If you want to overthrow a dictatorship(what's the point of using euphemisms like illiberal?) what you need is a mass movement that is too big for the state to handle.

The greater control a state today has because of surveillance is because of the current state of technology, you are not changing that by getting democracies to restrain themselves with laws. A dictator will just ignore these, making them completely pointless.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 11, 2025 14:05 UTC (Tue) by daroc (editor, #160859) [Link]

Okay -- The micropayment stuff was interesting, if not exactly on topic, but this has strayed far from the original topic. Let's stop here, please.

(Remember Debian? This is a song about Debian ...)

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 11, 2025 14:08 UTC (Tue) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (2 responses)

Not all just movements are popular initially. Some oppression can be restricted to small groups - and hence opposition will not easily or quickly rally mass support. One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. A terrorist today is a brave freedom fighter tomorrow (a wanted terrorist was just in the US white house).

It is interesting to see how my generation of techies - who when they were young would have nearly all been involved in or at least strongly supported the cypherpunk movement and been against the government in the crypto-wars of the 90s - have with often become more conservative at least in terms of supporting state control. People who once would have invoked May's (popularised by Schneier) four horseman of the Internet as a derisory label, now invoke those horsemen in support of the ever broadening tech-panopticon surveillance state.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 11, 2025 15:34 UTC (Tue) by malmedal (subscriber, #56172) [Link] (1 responses)

You don't seem to understand my point, crypto-currencies are only a useful tool against an opponent who are unwilling to use the standard dictatorship playbook, such as torture, arresting family members etc.

It's possible to write a fictional scenario where these really are the bad guys, but currently on planet earth none of the far to few countries that are actually respecting the rule of law deserve to be overthrown.

Your specific example refers to Syria, the old regime would have collapsed years earlier if they hadn't been propped up by the drug trade and associated money laundering so crypto was very much on the wrong side there.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 11, 2025 17:59 UTC (Tue) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

For clarity, and without intending to further the discussion. My reference to Syria was solely to illustrate the "One man's freedom fighter...." concept. My references to rising illiberalism were meant largely to refer to western democracies, which (to me) are steadily inching down ever more totalitarian paths - on both sides of the political spectrum (as and when they gain power). States already highly illiberal are of course also a concern.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 11, 2025 15:51 UTC (Tue) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link] (10 responses)

If you want to overthrow a dictatorship(what's the point of using euphemisms like illiberal?) what you need is a mass movement that is too big for the state to handle.

In Hungary (an illiberal democracy) the mass movement (a new opposition party) that grew too big to handle was (partly) sparked by an anonymous report that the president pardoned a pedophile-enabler. As far as I know, the guy who noticed that pardon (buried in official communication) and sent it to the press is still anonymous. So having an anonymous communication format has it merits even if a mass movement is required to replace the government.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 11, 2025 16:48 UTC (Tue) by malmedal (subscriber, #56172) [Link] (9 responses)

apologies if I'm not being clear, I'm only objecting to secret payments, not secret messages.

it is in a democracy's own best interest that its citizens can communicate safely without being overheard.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 11, 2025 18:12 UTC (Tue) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (8 responses)

As a final response.

We want to communicate anonymously (from the POV of others), without being overheard. We have looked at our threat model and our security requirements, and determined it is best served by obtaining phones running GrapheneOS. You lack the resources to obtain such a phone, and further the regime you are in views the purchase of secure phones as very suspicious - and you are likely to be put (at a minimum) under observation if such a purchase is detected. We have determined that it is best I purchase the phone for you (you havn't the resources), and we do so as anonymously as possible (so we have at least some plausible deniability if detected, e.g. intercepted shipment). I am known, in the wider world, to be associated with you.

One option is for me to use Tor to go to an anonymous online bazaar. Then to use an anonymous distributed payment method to buy a GrapheneOS phone, and have it shipped it to you (ideally, some drop-box or shared address that is at least not /uniquely/ associated with you). You and I know, from experience of others, that there is a minimal intercept rate on such shipments.

This is NOT an unrealistic example of how anonymous communication systems AND anonymous payment systems can be used to help protect activism in some places.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 11, 2025 20:12 UTC (Tue) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link]

> This is NOT an unrealistic example of how anonymous communication systems AND anonymous payment systems can be used to help protect activism in some places.

This is an example of a quasi-anoymous communication system that sorta works (except for the glaring problem that it's a literal *phone* which means you're going to be "anonymously" tracked by $telco and/or anyone running an ISMI catcher)

Take away the "phone" part of that and you can piggyback off of public/"open" wifi, again for varying degrees of anonymity. That said, a not-terribly-repressive regime can easily require folks to require some sort of government ID and/or tied to your device [1] as a condition to grant access to said wifi. And said regime can easily require all traffic to be routed through "great firewalls" or some other classification/inspection/tracking system [2]

And sure, you can interpose middlemen, but when $oppressive_regime has no qualms about disappearing its own citizens, all you'll accomplish is a slight delay in how long it takes your door to be kicked in.

> One option is for me to use Tor to go to an anonymous online bazaar. Then to use an anonymous distributed payment method

Again, the vulnerability here is the ability to convert this "payment method" into $national_currency on either end. Those exchanges are the choke points that governments can, and do, go after.

...I keep coming back to the "what threat vector are you trying to protect yourself against" question. Because a guido wielding a gympie trounces technical handwavery... every. single. time. (see xkcd #538)

[1] I experienced this a decade ago when traveling in the Middle East.
[2] This capability continues to be demonstrated by China

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 12, 2025 13:12 UTC (Wed) by malmedal (subscriber, #56172) [Link] (6 responses)

> This is NOT an unrealistic

It's unrealistic to the point where it looks like a parody. Is it intended as one?

Phones are widely available in almost all countries, it is rarely a hard to get item. In a country where they are hard to get, North Korea, they have implemented some kind of authorization scheme so only government provided phones can actually connect to the network, an activist firing up your graphene os phone will be arrested immediately.

(I believe they do have provisions for tourists calling abroad, but an activist trying this will be noticed and arrested)

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 12, 2025 17:08 UTC (Wed) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (5 responses)

"It's so unrealistic it's a parody!"...

1. proceeds to give an example of a country where phone purchases generally are restricted as described
2. fails to spot that my comment says "You lack the resources to obtain such a phone", so either I have to send you money somehow (anonymously) or I have to send a phone.
3. I may also be in the same restrictive regime, I just happen to have the resources to be buy the item.
4. There may be numerous other types of items useful to activism that one may wish to purchase for oneself or others anonymously.

If your argument really is that activists never need to buy anything that may be sensitive, where anonymity is desirable, then it is your argument that is parody.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 12, 2025 17:10 UTC (Wed) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

Also, even if one lives in a country where phone purchases are not of themselves restricted, it may still be desirable to not leave a record for the tech-surveillance panopticon that you purchased a very particular model of phone capable of running a more secure OS.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 12, 2025 19:02 UTC (Wed) by malmedal (subscriber, #56172) [Link] (3 responses)

> "It's so unrealistic it's a parody!"...

> 1. proceeds to give an example of a country where phone purchases generally are restricted as described

No, I'm pointing out that anybody trying to use your OS if likely to be arrested very quickly. The phone will need to authenticate itself to the network in order to prove that it is indeed an approved phone with the correct spyware installed.

> 2. fails to spot that my comment says "You lack the resources to obtain such a phone",

No, I'm saying that phones are ubiquitous, access to one is not a limitation and I'm saying that getting a Graphene OS phone is not going to help if you are physically in a dictatorship.

What activists need to do is to make their electronic signature as innocent as possible. One common tactic is to post coded messages to a popular forum that also used by normal people.

With your solution, as soon as the police finds the first activist with with a Graphene device, they will know what the traffic looks like and can use that that simply the search for the rest.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 12, 2025 19:28 UTC (Wed) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link]

> What activists need to do is to make their electronic signature as innocent as possible. One common tactic is to post coded messages to a popular forum that also used by normal people.

Along those lines, the Iranian revolution in the late 70s was famously seeded via already-ubiquitous cassette tapes of Khomeni's speeches.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 13, 2025 10:11 UTC (Thu) by farnz (subscriber, #17727) [Link] (1 responses)

The key to this is that "innocent until proven guilty" is an artefact of liberal societies. If you're in an illiberal society of some form, once you've been identified as a troublemaker, you will be found guilty of something; if necessary, police will plant or forge evidence to show that you've been involved with something society at large considers abhorrent.

Thus, your goal is to not do anything that would give the police a reason to look at you; you're reliant on the fact that there's more citizens than police, and thus they cannot monitor everyone in depth. The moment you do something that marks you out as "odd", you're either fully compliant with the regime (just slightly weird - maybe you like brandy more than vodka), or you're marked out as a troublemaker and they will find a way to get you.

Sending e-mail via a possibly sanctioned entity

Posted Nov 13, 2025 11:54 UTC (Thu) by malmedal (subscriber, #56172) [Link]

Arresting innocents is a common tactic yes. I forget the name, but a Soviet dissident recounted a conversation that went like "how long are you in for?" "Fifteen years" "what for?" "Nothing at all" "you're lying, nothing at all is ten years"