It was also developed by the United States Navy and has been criticized for not being as secure as it claims it is. This should come as no surprise since the US military and agencies have a history of demanding backdoors in software, which just means more attack vectors for outsiders to sniff out.
I make no claims that commercial VPNs are more secure, but at least they have some level of interest in keeping their promises if people are paying them, whereas a free service does not carry the same incentive.
The navy backdoor claims are unsubstantiated FUD unless you can point them out in the freely available and accessible code. Not to mention that they created the tool to also use themselves.
They also haven't had any influence or control in the development of todays tor project that has existed for over 20 years and despite a massive amount of attacks and research there has never been found anything.
That does not mean there aren't serious drawbacks that are more worth pointing out such as why bother with a very complex and noisy backdoor when you can just covertly create enough nodes to do traffic correlation.
> That does not mean there aren't serious drawbacks that are more worth pointing out such as why bother with a very complex and noisy backdoor when you can just covertly create enough nodes to do traffic correlation.
to be fair tor project is monitoring new nodes so it would need to be done slowly over time. still its the biggest threat to the network hence everybody should consider running no/low risk guard and middle nodes.
I make no claims that commercial VPNs are more secure, but at least they have some level of interest in keeping their promises if people are paying them, whereas a free service does not carry the same incentive.
Pick your poison, I guess.