usability, popularity vs security, Freedom Software purism

[onion_knight]

@xariv

Hope you don’t mind me saying, but most of your reply reads like a marketing PR or intro to Whonix written for someone who never seen it. Let’s stay on point.

No, just some enthusiastic writing from an enthusiastic user But you are right, let’s stay on point.

@xariv

This is really not a joke for many users.

Agreed. But then if we are talking about potential jail time, then additional measures are to be taken, such as encrypted USB disks, using bridges to connect to Tor, maybe connecting to public Wifi spots (although might not be a good idea in certain circumstances).

What I mean is that if it really is a question of life or death you surely need to be very up-to-date with OPSEC and anonymity topics, merely installing Whonix on Windows and expecting it to cover all your needs out of the box is unrealistic.

@xariv

Of course. Some been mentioned here by @micky and others appear in other threads throughout the wiki. Many already discussed by developers with decisions made to keep the current state as it is. A partial list:

• Tor Browser within Whonix includes the lowest safety level possible by default.
• The default clipboard sharing is Whonix VMs is the worst safety-wise (bi-directional sharing).
• The speakers in Whonix VMs are enabled by default, allowing malware to leak information to external infected devices.
• There is no mechanism in Whonix to whitelist applications (exists in Qubes). Suggestions to implement this as well as other mitigations of malware was reject due to lack of resources.
• Whonix forums, essentially the only realistic option to get support, require Javascript and in some cases lower security settings in Tor Browser.

Thanks for the concrete examples.

• Tor Browser: good point, maybe open a new topic (don’t know if it has been already discussed recently or not)?

• The default clipboard sharing is Whonix VMs is the worst safety-wise (bi-directional sharing) → can be disabled very easily. In KVM, disabled by default.

• The speakers in Whonix VMs are enabled by default, allowing malware to leak information to external infected devices → it’s being currently discussed, so nothing definitive here as I understand:

disable speaker by default or optional for better security?

Agreed. Whonix takes some learning though, for sure, especially if both Whonix and the virtualizer are new to the user. End of the day users stay with defaults. The peculiarities in Whonix (no sound by default for example) are well worth some more support tickets if the tradeoff is lower security. Sure, we can instruct users to turn it off themselves / use headphones etc. But if the users read that there’d be no problem in the first place. Created: http://forums.dds6qkxpwdeubwucdiaord2xgbbe…

@xariv

• There is no mechanism in Whonix to whitelist applications (exists in Qubes). Suggestions to implement this as well as other mitigations of malware was reject due to lack of resources.
• Whonix forums, essentially the only realistic option to get support, require Javascript and in some cases lower security settings in Tor Browser.

Valid points. If you have the skills and time, I am sure your contribution to the first point would be very valuable. As for the forums, I am afraid there is nothing we can do as long as we use discourse.

@xariv

A complex topic with no doubt in Whonix. A very easy topic elsewhere:

1. Install Tor browser.
2. Sign up for VPN.
3. Install VPN app on host.

Bang! you got VPN before Tor setting. All done with clicks! No editing of configuration files! No creating users or changing permissions! Not breaking stream isolation (coz they never had it).

This setting is actually a requirement for many Tor users (whether it’s good for them or not it’s another question) - I can promise you the vast majority of them can do the above as I described and will not get into doing the setting in Whonix. Yes we can improve education (wiki) but we should admit that Whonix isn’t for everybody.

A majority of people will go for the easy path. That’s understandable and their own choice. This could also be achievable within Whonix, but it requires some commitment. But it is possible, and documented. So I think we agree it’s the user choice eventually. And yes, Whonix is probably not for everybody or lazy users, but there is nothing that inherently prevents it from being used by anybody.

@xariv

Great! so let’s ditch the plans to work on windows installer / linux guide etc. and get back to the real tasks!

Regarding resources allocation, I think it really depends on who does what. If @Patrick or other core (and skilled) developers would devote half their time to documenting file permissions in Linux, then yeah that would be pretty bad I guess But if that would be me, or another regular user, that wouldn’t be a waste of resources, don’t you agree?

@xariv

That’s exactly what I wrote in my first paragraph.

my bad, must have missed this!