I need this for political/activist purposes. When a public service blocks Tor, I want to be able to say that the public service marginalises/disservices ppl on some platforms.

My first thought was Qubes OS, because it can be setup as a Tor-only platform. The flaw of course is that users can configure it either way. So the public service would argue that it was the user’s choice to configure it to not use clearnet. If an OS were to operate purely on anonymous networks with no direct clearnet access, this would have some niche applications for activism.

  • daveyOsbornOP
    1·
    6 days ago

    Tails worked on clearnet, last time I used it. It gave a choice between tor browser or a clearnet browser.

    • 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.worldEnglish
      4·
      6 days ago

      The current description of Tails seems to say the opposite. They say ALL traffic goes through Tor. And only the Tor Browser is installed.

      • daveyOsbornOP
        1·
        6 days ago

        thanks for pointing that out. I’ll have take look at their most recent version then.

        • theit8514@lemmy.world
          2·
          6 days ago

          IIRC there is a non-tor browser, which is included for things like logging in to wifi captive portals. Not sure I understand exactly what you’re after but you can uninstall the package if needed.

          • daveyOsbornOP
            1·
            5 days ago

            What I am after may not exist. Tails without a clearnet browser would be close. It would be ideal if the platform were clearnet-free out of the box. Even better: clearnet incapable.

            If I would uninstall the clearnet browser, that would be a deliberate act on my part to have a broken clearnet. It would be indefensible. The idea is to most faithfully play dumb when fighting public administrations who block tor.