Section 26.5. Conclusion

26.5. Conclusion

Users' safety relies on their behaving like other users. But how can they predict other users' behavior? If they need to behave in a way that's different from the rest of the users, how do they compute the tradeoffs and risks?

There are several lessons we might take away from researching anonymity and usability. On the one hand, we might remark that anonymity is already tricky from a technical standpoint, and if we're required to get usability right as well before anybody can be safe, it will be hard indeed to come up with a good design. If lack of anonymity means lack of users, then we're stuck in a depressing loop. On the other hand, the loop has an optimistic side too. Good anonymity can mean more users: if we can make good headway on usability, then as long as the technical designs are adequate, we'll end up with enough users to make everything work out.

In any case, declining to design a good solution means leaving most users to a less secure network or no anonymizing network at all. Cancer survivors and abuse victims would continue communications and research over the Internet, risking social or employment problems; and human rights workers in oppressive countries would continue publishing their stories.

The temptation to focus on designing a perfectly usable system before building it can be self-defeating, because obstacles to usability are often unforeseen. We believe that the anonymity community needs to focus on continuing experimental deployment.