[158573] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please help if
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Tue Dec 4 15:29:00 2012
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <F05D77A9631CAE4097F7B69095F1B06FD62E027D@EX02.drtel.lan>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 12:22:15 -0800
To: Brian Johnson <bjohnson@drtel.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Dec 4, 2012, at 09:32 , Brian Johnson <bjohnson@drtel.com> wrote:
> I know I'm going to get flamed and excoriated, but here goes....
>=20
> <snip>
>> case evolves in and out of court. Are Tor exit-node operators going =
to
>> be given the same rights as ISP's who's networks are used for illegal
>> purposes? I would hope so, but it doesn't seem like that has happened =
in
>> this case, so I am very interested to hear how the situation pans =
out.
>=20
> This is a misleading statement. ISP's (Common carriers) do not provide =
a knowingly illegal offering, AND they do provide the PHYSICAL =
infrastructure for packets to be passed and interconnected to other =
PHYSICAL networks. TOR exit/entrance nodes provide only the former. The =
lack of providing a physical infrastructure is crucial. Also, most ISP's =
(US specifically) are required by Law (under subpoena) to provide =
details to law enforcement.
>=20
I strongly disagree with you.
TOR exit nodes provide a vital physical infrastructure to free speech =
advocates who live in jurisdictions where strong forces are aligned =
against free speech. I'm sure most TOR exit node operators would happily =
provide all the details they have if presented with an appropriate =
subpoena.
> I really hate this idea of privacy on the Internet. If you really =
think you have the "right" to use the public infrastructure (to whatever =
extent you want to label the Internet as such) and be completely =
anonymous, I have a bridge to sell you. Network operators may treat your =
packets to whatever level of scrutiny that they may find necessary to =
determine if they want to pass your packets, keeping in mind that good =
operators want the Internet to work.
>=20
I really cherish this idea of privacy on the internet. It's a strong =
tool for enabling democracy and freedom of speech.
First, the internet hasn't been "public infrastructure" for a very long =
time. It's a loose collection of privately owned networks with very few =
pieces still owned by government institutions. I don't think anyone has =
asserted a "right" to use that infrastructure, but, I certainly value =
that there are people who choose to provide it. I think society benefits =
from having such infrastructure available.
I like free speech. I like that there are people making free speech =
possible in places where it is strongly discouraged. While I think it is =
a shame that child pornographers and other nefarious users are able to =
abuse this infrastructure to the detriment of society, the reality is =
that it is like any other tool. It has beneficial uses and harmful uses. =
Going after the tool is counterproductive and harmful.
> I'm waiting for the next hot "application" to use a widely known "bad" =
port and see what happens. :)
What's a "bad" port? 80? 443? 25? 587? Most of the malware these days =
uses one or more of those.
>=20
>>=20
>> It is extremely relevant to the Internet community and to free speech =
in
>> general.
>=20
> I'm actually in agreement that law enforcement may have overstepped =
here if the only reason was the TOR exit point, but having a TOR exit =
point to me, seems to be condoning the actions/statements/packets used =
through the exit point. You are knowingly hiding information that your =
local government may require you to disclose.
Having a TOR exit point is making an effort to provide a service. It =
doesn't condone the nefarious uses of the service any more than running =
an ISP condones running a warez site that happens to get transit =
services from said ISP.
Running a TOR exit node isn't hiding any information. It's simply not =
collecting the information in the first place. You can't hide =
information you never had.
>=20
> Short answer... don't use TOR. It's not a bad thing, but it's not a =
good thing either.
I strongly disagree. TOR is a tool. It's a very good thing in its =
ability to enable democratization of communications and freedom of =
speech. It also has some nefarious uses. Guess what... So do hammers. I =
don't see anyone calling for a ban on the sale of hammers or encouraging =
carpenters to stop using them.
Owen
