Re:Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over cen...
by Dylan16807 on Wednesday May 02, 2018 @08:00AM
(#16976093)
"Putting them at risk" not by doing anything to them, but by being near them.
The domain fronting could be set up in a way that doesn't spoof domains, and the risks would be exactly the same. The spoofing is a red herring. The issue is the mere idea that a censor would be unable to tell what domain a connection is for. The actual thing that puts people at risk is ridiculous to attack on a moral basis. It's the same as just existing in a crowd. Not grabbing someone to be your shield.
Re:Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over cen...
by zzzcpan on Wednesday May 02, 2018 @08:07AM
(#16976128)
In other words it's Amazon and Google who are willingly help censors to avoid a bit of collateral damage during strikes.
It's like helping Assad to find targets where people with opposing views live.
My point is - by employing domain fronting against censorship, you bet that the adversary will not ban the service you're using as a front. But they very well might just do that. At this point, everyone else using the service suffers. So that service, by refusing to be used as a domain front, is not just protecting its own interest - it's protecting interests of all the others who depend on it. You, on the other hand, are unilaterally putting those other people at risk. This does not make you a hero, it makes you a villain (even if a lesser one).