CN = nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
OU = Technology
O = The New York Times Company
Object Identifier (2 5 4 15) = Private Organization
DNS Name: nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: graylady3jvrrxbe.onion
DNS Name: *.graylady3jvrrxbe.onion
DNS Name: *.dev.graylady3jvrrxbe.onion
DNS Name: *.stg.graylady3jvrrxbe.onion
DNS Name: *.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.api.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.api.dev.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.api.stg.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.blogs.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.blogs.stg.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.blogs5.stg.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.dev.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.dev.blogs.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.newsdev.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.prd.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.sbx.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.stg.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.stg.blogs.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: *.stg.newsdev.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: www.bestsellers.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
DNS Name: www.homedelivery.nytimes3xbfgragh.onionYou aren't being attentive enough for high risk activities. You lack proper verification channels, to confirm authenticity, which matters in this context. You lack the situational awareness to proceed safely.
Admit that you might not be cut out for what it takes to maintain a secure posture on the internet, if that's what gets you. Just stop pretending to try.
onion.nytimes.com CNAME nytimes3xbfgragh.onion
Edit to clarify - more a technical pondering than a solution to anything
I just generated "omen coins car hoof.onion" right now, in a couple of seconds, with my laptop CPU. With a couple of GTX1080s you could easily find some much better .onions than the ones NYT chose.
EV ensures that the entity (person, corp, org, whatever) is in fact in control of the domain and is who they say they are.
https://www.troyhunt.com/on-the-perceived-value-ev-certs-cas...
There's a couple of other differences with .onion certs too: https://certsimple.com/help/tor-support
Single onion services are a thing now for quiet some time actually: https://web.archive.org/web/20161219230314/https://blog.torp... (had to use archive.org since images are broken on their blog currently)
People wanting to access NYT site via Tor, can just navigate to https://www.nytimes.com/ and it'll be significantly faster than the .onion equivalent.
This isn't true, exits are currently in short supply. And onion services don't use exits, so it will result in a faster speed, especially since they may have made it as a single onion service[1].
[1] : https://web.archive.org/web/20161219230314/https://blog.torp...
Handy graph for anyone curious about the benefits of Tor [0]
If so, they're leaving their users-who-want-to-stay-relatively-anonymous open to attack via the advertisement vector. Members of that group would be considered high-value targets simply due to their anonymity desires.
I can't see the number of daily users being large enough that they'd lose significant profit by closing that attack vector. Hell, if there was a way to pay NYT enough to disable ads on all their services, I'd do it.
The Tor Browser Bundle (desktop) has different defaults than Orfox (phone), and I think both will connect to non-onion URLs when connecting to an onion site. Same for JS, ad-block, etc.
There are zero good web browsers with socks5 support. (which is needed for tor)
Consider donating!
https://blog.torproject.org/breaking-through-censorship-barr...
[1] : https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/meek
[2] : https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/Snowflake
Onion websites should be isolated and should not initiate any connections to vanilla internet.
Edit: it also loads scripts from www.google.com, tags.bluekai.com, cdn.optimizely.com...
Tor can also hide where Bob's servers are, but not sure if the New York Times would need that bit.
I forgot there are other governments too... shame, I'm not even from the US.
It’s possible that Tor makes it harder to enforce the rule that you can’t read more than X articles per month (which I believe is enforced using cookies and your IP address) but at this early stage, I’m not sure that’s key: people who know how to use Tor generally can easily go around that limitation on https.
If too many people use that loophole to read without a subscription, that means NYTimes would have been instrumental in making Tor mainstream. That would be a major achievement in itself. Enforcing similar consumption limits through Tor would probably be rather experimental, but sounds hardly difficult (especially with the goodwill NYTimes would have most likely gained from Tor developers & supporters).
Their current X (which I think is 10) articles per month limit is enforced via cookies. If you're like me and have your browser set to automatically clear all cookies and persistent state on close, you never even notice it exists.
A hidden service is set for information can not be safely presented on the public Internet. Like what The Daily Stormer did.
If one just wanted to bypass blocking or hide himself from evil third parties, he could just use tor browser to open NYT's regular domain instead of the hidden service domain, no?
There are also some security benefits, since connections to hidden services are automatically encrypted and authenticated, no HTTPS or trust in Certificate Authorities required (though HTTPS with EV certs can still be useful for identification purposes).
There were many discussions before settling on Medium and alternatives were considered (such as dogfooding our own CMS). We have a lot of work in-flight to modernize and simplify our publishing stack, and the timing wasn't right to rely on internal tools to publish a new blog.
I know DuckDuckGo has their own hidden service, but it seems that site only returns results from the regular internet, not from other hidden services.
I think you responded to your own question.
Besides that there are lists of onion services. Apparently there are also search services like https://ahmia.fi/
This action is not supported over Onion yet, sorry.
Why would anyone run a legal onion service?
Thanks Alec Muffett (OP) for the following summary copied from this comment
Understandably folk tend to think "Anonymity!" when talking about Tor Onions, but in rolling out the Facebook onion we established several clear benefits:
1. better and safer experience for people accessing over Tor: no interference by exit nodes, no bandwidth-contention for exit nodes, no use of exit nodes at all.
2. "good neighbour" - reciprocally, popular sites can unload themselves from eating up scarce exit-node bandwidth.
3. "a peace offering" - people (continue to) use Facebook over Tor; 3 years ago we saw 500,000/month, more recently ~1 million. Overwhelmingly we found (through measurement and assessment) that people using Facebook over Tor were ordinary folk wanting to do ordinary things. especially in times of political crisis. Providing a metaphorical "olive branch" showed that we value their use of the site.
4. Discretion & Trust. Onion Sites are considered to be about "Anonymity", but really they offer two more features: Discretion (eg: your employer or ISP cannot see what you are browsing, not even what site) and trust (if you access facebookcorewwwi.onion you are definitely connected to Facebook, because of the nature of Onion addressing; no DNS or CA shenanigans are applicable.)
[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/TOR/comments/792mfr/the_new_york_ti...
In the U.S., the Times published Chelsea Manning's leaked State Dept documents, it broke the story on Hilary Clinton's email sever, it reported the Wikileaks' DNC emails for months up to the US presidential election, and now it aggressively goes after Trump. While it's imperfect, I don't see which part of the establishment it so strongly supports.
The State Department. NYT is vital in fabricating the history of conflicts and internal problems that have ever affected the United States.
to name a few : Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, the War on Drugs, the Indochina wars, Cuba, Mexico, outside-of-country extradition, continual abuse and outright breaking of UN laws and sanctions, etc.
That's not even mentioning their (the NYT) history of character assassination with regards to civil rights leaders, activists, authors, speakers, and alternative thinkers.
...OR you get the Chomsky treatment, and they pretend that you don't exist for a few decades.
I didn't bother with citations, there are plenty to read through with just a cursory search engine query, but since I already invoked the name of the beast, i'll let him tell you about NYT[0].
NYT's is systematically biased in who or what it chooses to illuminate for the public to digest. Don't be surprised when they do good by you -- it's all character building -- just like this news that they're embracing tor.
Boy, aren't they just keen!
[0]Noam Chomsky: The New York Times is pure propaganda: https://www.salon.com/2015/05/25/noam_chomsky_the_new_york_t...
.onion is not for sites being blocked in China, you can just use tor and access the nytimes.com web site from there. .onion is for websites that get their domain confiscated by their domain providers or the feds, very unlikely to happen to the NYT. See what happened to sites such as the pirate bay or more recently the neo-nazi site dailystormer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Stormer#Site_hosting...
> "Some readers choose to use Tor to access our journalism because they’re technically blocked from accessing our website; or because they worry about local network monitoring; or because they care about online privacy; or simply because that is the method that they prefer."
Nothing to hide except when the wrong guy gets in power then you feel naked
And if yes, does their adoption of https in 2014[0]\ then imply that they were equally suspicious of the previous administration?
[0]: https://open.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/embracing-https/
[...]and they provide additional guarantees that readers are connected securely to our website.[...]
> So is it now "guaranteed", that TOR is secure?
Your quote does not imply that
What're the equivalent or similar features in other browsers (e.g. Chrome)? Incognito mode?
Safe browsing guys
//edit: if you want extra security. Launch TOR from a remote desktop. And I am not talking about the ones you buy from known VPN providers like NordicVPN or amazon web services.
a) Infiltrating chats where people are more likely to share sensitive information / trust the people they're talking to
b) Poor configurations/ setups on either the client or server (client browser bundle has noscript, but it's not on the strictest settings, js is enabled iirc)
c) Exploitation of client or server due to out of date versions, things like that
Historically I think it's always fallen into one of these cases - and not just what the FBI etc say publicly but we've seen these exploits ITW. I wouldn't be surprised if the NSA and other agencies have the power to deanonymize TOR users but if it were trivial why is the majority of TOR traffic still going towards illegal content? Last I read (a paper a year ago) TOR is still primarily all about drugs, followed by child pornography (mostly drugs though iirc). If they can track all of these people by breaking TOR completely... why don't they?
Can you provide evidence for this claim? I'm a huge conspiracy nut, this has me excited.
No, if you want extra security use Qubes OS with Whonix (it comes with it by default) for isolating the Tor process in a single VM and the browser in another - thereby prohibiting any leaks, unless an adversary has a VM escape RCE.
Really? Perhaps you could explain how every single one of us found out it is true? Maybe every single one of us has a friend working in the NSA who was willing to tell us, even though he could go to jail for giving away such a secret?
Or maybe you are just making things up.