10
Does there exist a clearnet-incapable OS? (infosec.pub)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/linux@sopuli.xyz
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/41531898

I need this for political/activist purposes. When a public service blocks Tor, I want to be able to say that the public service marginalises/disservices ppl on some platforms.

My first thought was Qubes OS, because it can be setup as a Tor-only platform. The flaw of course is that users can configure it either way. So the public service would argue that it was the user’s choice to configure it to not use clearnet. If an OS were to operate purely on anonymous networks with no direct clearnet access, this would have some niche applications for activism.

all 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 6 points 9 months ago (1 child)

I like where your head is at but this feels like an impossible stretch. If you have the technical knowledge to run Tails, you aren't being blocked.

It'd be like shutting off your water, locking the mechanical room, and suing your landlord

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    I like where your head is at but this feels like an impossible stretch. If you have the technical knowledge to run Tails, you aren’t being blocked.

    It’s perhaps more complex than you realise. There are several facets to this with a broad range of effects, which is not necessarily just a Tor-acceptance problem.

    Tor-blocking sites do not have the decency to so much as state /why/ they have blocked you. They either send a generic “403 forbidden”, or they drop packets and it times out, or you get a broken CAPTCHA. In the latter two cases you can’t even be sure Tor is the issue. They do not treat visitors with dignity. So playing dumb when facing them is a good policy. E.g. “I could not pay my taxes on time because I get this screen:…” then go boomer on them and send a camera pic of a timed out connection. If they take some time to investigate and chase their tails a bit, that’s already a win to some extent, in some situations. We want to penalise them for not even having the decency of transparency.

    It’d be like shutting off your water, locking the mechanical room, and suing your landlord

    Hence why Qubes is not ideal. But if there is an OS that simply excludes clearnet, I might say (when pressed): “my friend gave me this laptop.. said it was safer than Windows”¹. But the conversation never goes that far.

    The baby step micro-goal is just to get a bit of due transparency and dignity. Not “403 Forbidden” but rather “We’re sorry, we detect you are using Tor and we do not have the competency to secure against Tor users”, or “we need to track you, thus cannot accept traffic from Tor or VPNs”.

    ¹ Note that this scenario is becoming increasingly realistic. A local group of volunteers offers gratis advice and support for digital self-defense. Some people walk away with Tails and only a superficial idea of what they have.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    Tails?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Whonix

    Tails

    Both do what you want

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

    Sorry for the late reply. But for the record I must say Tails does not do what I want because Tails gives clearnet access. The UI discourages it, but the possibility is there to open a browser on clearnet.

    You may be right about Whonix.. I have yet to tinker with it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •