Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Raided for running a Tor exit - Accepting donations for legal expenses - Page 7
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Raided for running a Tor exit - Accepting donations for legal expenses

145791026

Comments

  • @Liam said: Quote BBC "Police raided the home of William Weber, who ran the servers, and charged him with distributing illegal images." - He's been charged? Seems a little slanderous...

    Charged and Convicted are two different things.

  • @Liam since when do you trust what news sites claim? :)

  • On this site: It shows it was 12th November; we've been out of the loop for a while!

    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/11/tor-operator-charged-for-child-porn-transmitted-over-his-servers/

    (Check side image on the right, I don't speak this language, but I can read numbers!:))

  • LeeLee Veteran

    I will risk the beating and jump out here and say that well founded intentions or not, providing a service that allows the distribution of things like Child Porn should be stopped. The thinly veiled excuse of privacy and freedom is not a reason to then accept the abuse that some will use the sever for or wash your hands of that abuse.

    If indecent images of children are now in the hands of hundreds, maybe even thousands of more people as a result of this node then that's just sickening.

    If you are smart enough to run the service you are smart enough to know what it may be getting used for and therefore you accept the risk.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran
    edited November 2012

    @W1V_Lee said: The thinly veiled excuse of privacy and freedom is not a reason to then accept the abuse that some will use the sever for or wash your hands of that abuse.

    Allowing, let's say, someone from Iran to speak out without fear of being punished by their government is not, in any way, a thinly veiled excuse. It actually gets utilized to spread information outside of areas that people generally fear getting caught by their oppressive leaders. Information that can lead to the rest of the world having a clue what really goes on there. I agree with your sentiment but you have to draw a line somewhere. Child porn was around before the internet, it would be around after the internet. I'm not saying turn a blind eye to it, but you have to ask yourself just how far is too far in trying to stop people from doing things. You can't control the world. The only real answer is to wipe out the human race. You have to decide where you think that line has to be drawn and try to work on this side of it. Don't quit, just don't seek an end using means that punish everyone else. It's difficult to pick a right answer here, personal conviction goes a long way.

    Ask yourself this: Is there ever a legitimate case for remaining anonymous? If so, the tool used will be exploited by those who wish to remain anonymous for such disgusting reasons. Does this fact always, every single time, outweigh the legitimate case? Answering "yes" would be the only logical reason for fully opposing TOR.

    @W1V_Lee said: providing a service that allows the distribution of things like Child Porn should be stopped.

    image

  • To be quite honest, if the judge is shown exactly what a TOR exit node is, and how it's uncontrollable and that it's just a method of "VPN" with no logs and anonymous communication, then he should be let off. Unless X server actually holds or has evidence of these images once being on the hard drive, It's unlikely he'll get charged.

    The negative about this, is that judges, everywhere, are so "WHAT THE FUCK CP" they'll not listen to reason.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    @eastonch said: Let's turn this around buddy!

    Indeed, lets make the case for anonymity and Tor in general !
    Show it is legal and many oppressed ppl used it to access the "free" internet ! Make the connection with the arab spring, iran and china !

  • @eastonch said: To be quite honest, if the judge is shown exactly what a TOR exit node is, and how it's uncontrollable and that it's just a method of "VPN" with no logs and anonymous communication, then he should be let off. Unless X server actually holds or has evidence of these images once being on the hard drive, It's unlikely he'll get charged.
    The negative about this, is that judges, everywhere, are so "WHAT THE FUCK CP" they'll not listen to reason.

    I wonder if they'll ever try to charge him for criminal negligence in that case?

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    @W1V_Lee said: If indecent images of children are now in the hands of hundreds, maybe even thousands of more people as a result of this node then that's just sickening.

    Same goes for e-mail services, https, dial-in BBS, phone-lines, regular mail, heck, it is fairly easy to send anonymous packages of envelopes containing god knows what, sniffer dogs wont catch photos or sd cards...
    This whole "crusade" is really sickening...

  • unusedunused Member
    edited November 2012

    @eastonch said: On this site: It shows it was 12th November; we've been out of the loop for a while!

    Stock photo? Edit: nevermind, I can read his name. It's more likely the warrant/whatever they call it was granted on the 12th, and only executed yesterday-

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    @eastonch said: It shows it was 12th November; we've been out of the loop for a while!

    Could it be that the court order was issued before it was utilized?

  • @unused said: Stock photo?

    No, William scanned the court order.

  • @Liam - seems like the bbc article overreached with the "Charged" statement - based on the @Williams interview anyway. (Explicitly mentions he has not been charged, walked away etc..)

  • @unused judging by the http://raided4tor.cryto.net/ site it has alot of "inconsistencies" in the police force giving rights etc, if they were hoping for a mega take down, you'd expect 'BY THE BOOK'.

  • joepie91joepie91 Member, Patron Provider

    @eastonch said: On this site: It shows it was 12th November; we've been out of the loop for a while!

    That's the date of approval of the court order, as far as I can determine.

    @W1V_Lee said: I will risk the beating and jump out here and say that well founded intentions or not, providing a service that allows the distribution of things like Child Porn should be stopped.

    Time to shut down the internet!

    @W1V_Lee said: The thinly veiled excuse of privacy and freedom is not a reason to then accept the abuse that some will use the sever for or wash your hands of that abuse.

    I suggest you shut your mouth with accusations of 'thinly veiled excuses' until you have actual first-hand experience with people in various countries who depend on TOR for their fucking life.

    @W1V_Lee said: If indecent images of children are now in the hands of hundreds, maybe even thousands of more people as a result of this node then that's just sickening.

    Oh yeah, of course, your issue isn't with the children that are being abused. Your issue is with people having pictures that you personally find sickening! Way to go there buddy.

    Asshole.

  • popcorn

  • @W1V_Lee said: providing a service that allows the distribution of things like Child Porn Free Speech should be stopped.

    Your ability to post online would have to be stopped as well with your logic, do you really feel as you do? Of maybe it was just a knee-jerk reaction?

  • This has become quite a big event!! Take a look at the bbc news website in the technology section!

  • It was also on the home page under "Technology" but it's now replaced with "Internet 'cut off across Syria"

  • ReeRee Member
    edited November 2012

    @joepie91 said: Guess what? You're never going to find out, so might as well not raid in the first place. If someone is smart enough to set up a TOR node to mask his activity, then he's also smart enough to encrypt his shit so that nothing is found when searched.

    Not necessarily. Look at the guy who used photoshop to swirl his face in CP pictures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Paul_Neil). I'll bet if you asked a bunch of random people, 99.9% would say that was a smart thing to do and he'd never get caught. Didn't quite work that way for him though, since he used a (mostly) lossless transformation.

    Same thing could happen to somebody using encryption. You take a smart idea like encrypting all the incriminating evidence and make a boneheaded mistake like using "cp_rules" as your key.

    As much as it sucks for William, it would be absolutely horrible for the police to say "oh, just another exit node, no need to investigate". And if I'm reading your post right you're taking it one step further and saying "even if we think the exit node is a cover for something, that means he's waaaay to smart for us so why even bother trying to catch him".

  • ****NOTE i AM NOT STANDING UP FOR THE SICKO'S****

    That said the US view on CP is not the same as every other country in the world. I have seen european magazines that show nake 16 year olds in them, now they were not in sexual nature, but in the us that wouldn't matter that is still CP as they are under the age of 18. So the defenition of CP is different where ever you come from. In the US we look at a picture of Marky Mark in boxers (calvin klien ad from the 80's I think) and we as a country went nuts about it being CP even though he had underoo's on.

  • @24khost said: I have seen european magazines that show nake 16 year olds in them, now they were not in sexual nature, but in the us that wouldn't matter that is still CP as they are under the age of 18

    Wrong, in the USA if the child is under 18 you can show nude pictures of them IF they are non sexual. It is a grey area though.

  • joepie91joepie91 Member, Patron Provider

    @Ree said: Not necessarily. Look at the guy who used photoshop to swirl his face in CP pictures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Paul_Neil). I'll bet if you asked a bunch of random people, 99.9% would say that was a smart thing to do and he'd never get caught. Didn't quite work that way for him though, since he used a (mostly) lossless transformation.

    Visual transformations have squat to do with encryption.

    @Ree said: Same thing could happen to somebody using encryption. You take a smart idea like encrypting all the incriminating evidence and make a boneheaded mistake like using "cp_rules" as your key.

    Do you really think that someone running a TOR node to mask his activity would use such a simple, stupid, and ridiculously predictable password?

    @Ree said: And if I'm reading your post right you're taking it one step further and saying "even if we think the exit node is a cover for something, that means he's waaaay to smart for us so why even bother trying to catch him".

    That is exactly what I'm saying. Target the producers instead.

    @24khost said: ****NOTE i AM NOT STANDING UP FOR THE SICKO'S****

    This kind of note should not be necessary.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    @24khost said: That said the US view on CP is not the same as every other country in the world.

    Technically, in US you are a kid up to 21, but, of course, being tough on crime that changes when you are over 12/14/16. So, you have the adult mind when you pick pockets, but not when you fuck.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    @Maounique said: you have the adult mind when you pick pockets, but not when you

    Well we're taught not to steal before we can walk, and we're not taught about the other until later on. Makes sense that you have more time to grow into understanding one than the other by a certain age.

  • @joepie91 it shouldn't but i don't want anything misconstrued. At this point I follow the American way innocent until proven guilty. Okay latley in America it is the other way around but I would rather follow what is meant to be. We will stick with @William until we are proven the charges are true. Same way that right now until the usada can show me real proof, not circumstantial evidence, or paid testimonies from proven cheaters, I will stick that Lance is not guilty.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    @jarland said: and we're not taught about the other until later on.

    That is not the child's fault, but the church's fault. Sex is a part of life, even more so than stealing.

  • joepie91joepie91 Member, Patron Provider
    edited November 2012

    @24khost said: @joepie91 it shouldn't but i don't want anything misconstrued

    I'd say that the first step to getting people to treat criticism on this topic in a normal way, is not "playing their game" by adding statements like the above, and simply saying what you think. If you keep excusing yourself for casting your opinion, it will always stay a taboo.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    @24khost said: We will stick with @William until we are proven the charges are true.

    Heck, you'll have to convince me twice that they are even then. It could have been any one of a number of us here in the same situation.

  • CVPS_ChrisCVPS_Chris Member, Patron Provider

    Laugh. So much for the $10million a year

This discussion has been closed.