Torzon Decisions Every choice this involves, with what each option costs you

Torzon addresses

Nine published addresses for one market. Copy rather than retype. Which one to use is a decision with a page of its own.

torzon4v7bcakvo7qikdfknewj4dlr44hkyv4jyfrkl7ci3zqn76kiid.onion
atmqbitgx7g5c4gdc4t23erlpvub7c3agbmky6on6vxcfs26fuj3usqd.onion
dgkozv5myc3lfpedjl2khhk6icok2xm5wmc5vg42xvbyh4fs345mopyd.onion
evwigej45n3nywbn3aqdun4o6cgjyfgxf2ts7lm6no3uotxanpeuosad.onion
fr6bvsrcx7ajxou7kyme5otctzdmpllum6iqootcjnwmzepuuams2tad.onion
h3h66vql4ucodjre4bluwtywhoq2bjqxpgvxgv2xo2nkui5ney6gslqd.onion
jcyjjcu4oocqkgxyq4d6mmbuuha5db7iz3zifhf2cm6n6m5mvogxwqyd.onion
ncmebasolcj2pmw5oy2bco4r65jbcqznrujtxcalz6e2b2jmhjlf44ad.onion
otw35cxf2rssl23tsvtqjwj32u62q4becl2jmgvekuemptxli7gt5lyd.onion

This list is published, not monitored. An address that opens is not an address that is genuine, and checking a signature is the only thing that settles it.

Start › The decisions

Verify every time or not

Almost nobody decides to stop checking. They decide once that this particular time is fine, and then that becomes the habit.

Every single time

What you gain
The only defence that works against a convincing copy, applied when you need it rather than when you remember.
What you give up
Under a minute per session, plus an hour of setup once. The real cost is that it feels pointless for months at a time.
Suits
Everyone. This is the closest thing to a rule on this site.

Only when something feels wrong

What you gain
Almost no ongoing effort, and it catches the obvious cases.
What you give up
A good copy produces no feeling. That is the entire point of building one, so this policy is absent exactly when it was needed.
Suits
Nobody, though it is what most people actually do without having chosen it.

Never, and rely on the address list

What you gain
Nothing to learn and nothing to maintain.
What you give up
You are trusting whoever published the list, permanently, including on the day the list is wrong or the page is not what it appears.
Suits
People who accept they are trusting a third party. Worth being honest with yourself about, rather than pretending otherwise.

Why the middle option fails

It assumes a copy feels different. Sometimes one does, and a vague sense that something is off is worth acting on. But the copies worth worrying about are copied wholesale, load faster than the real thing because they carry no load, and open on the characters you recognise.

So a policy of checking when something feels wrong is a policy of checking against amateurs and not against anybody who put effort in. It produces confidence without the coverage that would justify it, which is worse than having no policy.

What it actually costs

Time
Establishing a fingerprint from independent sourcesAbout an hour, once, ever
Each check afterwardsUnder a minute
Reading the output properlyTwo seconds, and it is the part people skip
The two seconds that matterRead which key signed and the date inside the signed text, not just whether the word good appears. A correct signature from the wrong key, and a genuine old statement replayed today, both produce output containing that word.

What tips it

Nothing, honestly. This is the one decision on the site where the options are not balanced, and the page exists to show you the shape of the failure rather than to present a genuine trade. The useful thing it can tell you is why the habit decays: it produces no visible result for months, and then produces the only result that ever mattered on one evening you did not see coming.

The people who lose accounts are rarely the ones who never learned this. They are the ones who did it for a year, got comfortable, and quietly stopped.