[158388] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please help if
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Barry Shein)
Thu Nov 29 13:00:51 2012
From: Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 12:58:22 -0500
To: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
In-Reply-To: <CCAF8F74-9F47-4E0F-BC97-33F6F11BDC26@ianai.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On November 29, 2012 at 11:45 patrick@ianai.net (Patrick W. Gilmore) wrote:
> On Nov 29, 2012, at 11:17 , Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com> wrote:
>
> > It's funny, it's all illusion like show business. It's not hard to set
> > up anonymous service, crap, just drop in at any wi-fi hotspot, many
> > just ask you to click that you accept their T&Cs and you're on. Would
> > they raid them, I was just using one at a major hospital this week
> > that was just like that, if someone used that for child porn etc? But
> > I guess stick your nose out and say you're specifically offering anon
> > accts and watch out I guess.
>
> Do you think if the police found out child pr0n was being served from a starbux they wouldn't confiscate the equipment from that store?
I dunno, has it ever happened? I mean confiscated the store's
equipment, I assume that's what you mean. Is that because no one has
ever been involved with child porn etc from a Starbucks? Does that
seem likely? I don't know, really.
And why would confiscating it from one location address the issue if
they offer anonymous hotspots (I don't know if they do but whatever,
there are plenty of others) at all locations and they're one company?
It would seem like they'd have to confiscate the equipment at every
Starbucks in their jurisdiction, which could be every one in the US
for example.
-b
