I'm not looking to redefine the label, just clarify it.The public already decided on the label, it now seems apparent that you and the guy who wrote the original article are the ones who are claiming it should be redefined. That's not the public, and I'm afraid that you, or the author of the article, do not have the clout to redefine an already established term.
I urge to re-read the original article generating the comotion in this thread, and see if you can see the obvious flaws in it. This guy really has little knowledge of what he is talking about.
I see the flaws, he's either confused or deliberately trying to lump multiple things together.
Your service is appreciated. I myself have worked with the military on several technology based projects.As a 10 year veteran of two wars, a person who studied technology in college and teaches it everyday, I can assure you that this is not the case.
I would very much appreciate if you would point out where I am wrong in my claims.This sounds like extreme layman speculation, and I'm not sure what you are trying to get at with all of your conjecture. I won't point out each claim you make and how they are wrong (mostly) in attempt to keep this on topic.
Here's some links to help provide backing to my claims:
Advanced Encryption Standard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Data Encryption Standard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Federal Information Processing Standard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
United States Military Standard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Commercial off-the-shelf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
SkyGrabber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2003 Attack on Karbala - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
U.S. Air Force Calls Drone Fleet Virus a 'Nuisance' | Defense News | defensenews.com
Exclusive: Computer Virus Hits U.S. Drone Fleet | Danger Room | Wired.com
McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Boeing B-52 Stratofortress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
M1 Abrams - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
US Army struggles with Windows to Linux overhaul ? The Register
(As far as the creditability and validity of Wikipages, I direct everyone to the bottom part of the page with all the cited links)
Tor itself may not be currently used by the military, however onion routing was a concept spearheaded by the US Naval Research Labs.Bottom line, they don't use TOR to secure communications (is that an oxymoron? TOR doesn't really secure anything.) Some folks in the military may use it for personal reasons, but that's not the same as saying the "military" uses it. That would be like saying the military drives mustang GT's because some guy in it owns one. Most people don't even have a clue that TOR exists let a lone posses the technical prowess to get it to work, they block this kind of thing.
However, without any proof that Tor or any onion routing software isn't in use, a claim can't be made in that aspect either.
Washington Times piece for some consideration:
Iranians seeking to share videos and other eyewitness accounts of the demonstrations that have roiled their country since disputed elections two weeks ago are using an Internet encryption program originally developed by and for the U.S. Navy.
Designed a decade ago to secure Internet communications between U.S. ships at sea, The Onion Router, or TOR, has become one of the most important proxies in Iran for gaining access to Web sites such as Twitter, YouTube and Facebook.
Iranian protesters avoid censorship with Navy technology - Washington Times
How do you define credible? Military Sources? Media Sources? Most would consider the EFF a fairly credible source.The links you provided aren't very credible. Just because someone says something on the internet, doesn't make it true.
Would you deny the use of Gopher Protocols by the military?I will admit, however, that it's feasible that there MAY be some obscure use of it somewhere in the military, but I have no evidence to back up this claim and therefore will not spread this conjecture as a "truth".
I doubt there is any documented and credible sources provided by the US Military to will confirm the use of Gopher Protocols, let alone Onion Routing software.