Number of Tor users recently halved
metrics.torproject.org
metrics.torproject.org
[1] https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/metrics-team/2015-Nov...
I'm not saying that the above situation is likely, just that it is possible.
Why would they even take actions which disclose the change? Why not just change the nature of their queries?
https://metrics.torproject.org/userstats-relay-country.html?...
A: Relays and bridges report some of the data in 24-hour intervals which may end at any time of the day. And after such an interval is over relays and bridges might take another 18 hours to report the data. We cut off the last two days from the graphs, because we want to avoid that the last data point in a graph indicates a recent trend change which is in fact just an artifact of the algorithm.
Q: But I noticed that the last data point went up/down a bit since I last looked a few hours ago. Why is that?
A: The reason is that we publish user numbers once we're confident enough that they won't change significantly anymore. But it's always possible that a directory reports data a few hours after we were confident enough, but which then slightly changed the graph.
from the Q&A https://gitweb.torproject.org/metrics-web.git/tree/doc/users...
The drop appears to happen on Nov 13th[1], I think that period should've been fully reported.
The only event I could find in the tor repo on that day was a version bump for 0.2.7[2], but node lists don't report any usage for that version yet, so I doubt it's related.
It's all quite weird, because there seems to be no drop in consumed bandwidth in the same period[3].
[1]: https://metrics.torproject.org/userstats-relay-country.png?s...
[2]: https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/commit/?id=741d2dc685a...
[3]: https://metrics.torproject.org/bandwidth.png?start=2015-11-1...
This is seemingly tangential but when untargeted surveillance is used steganography beats encryption.