7 ms·

While I applaud the police for being an unobtrusive as they could, this sort of discretionary enforcement is worrying in and of itself. In no small part, becaus

by ghkbrew 11y ago

While I applaud the police for being an unobtrusive as they could, this sort of discretionary enforcement is worrying in and of itself. In no small part, because it seems to set a precedent that they could have raided his house and impounded all his computer for no other reason than he was running a Tor exit node.

Laaw 11y ago
But it does give a judge something to point at and be like, "Why couldn't you do it here (in a different situation) like you did over there (this situation)?" Not much, admittedly, but it's something.
techthroway443 11y ago
It's not worrying at all. Running a Tor exit node in itself isn't a problem. The problem arises when the exit node operator knowingly is giving up control over the traffic going through his connection. If you run a tor exit node you need to accept the fact there is a chance something illegal is passing through and that when it happens (as it did here) you are going to get investigated. It would be irresponsible and neglectful for law enforcement not to raid this man's home.
- EdHominem 11y ago
  They probably sent the picture in the first place.
  - peppaz 11y ago
    This probably isn't wrong, the FBI is the largest holder of CP in the world, last time it was reported on.
    - Godel_unicode 11y ago
      They have copies of CP collected as evidence, therefore they are distributing it? By this logic, the DEA evidence locker might make them the biggest crack dealer in the US.
      - FireBeyond 11y ago
        The FBI has, on multiple admitted occasions, ran both honeypots for CP, and on seizing a CP site, continued to run it for multiple months to get more suspects. I have no issue with the intent, and such things are - in a restricted manner - allowed for, see prostitution stings. But the fact that they -do- distribute CP is verifiable fact.
        lotharbot 11y ago
        and the fact that they hold large amounts of CP -- which is the wording the prior post used -- is also verifiable fact. I'm not even concerned that they hold it. Sometimes it's evidence. Sometimes it can be used to identify and rescue victims. Sometimes it just goes in a database and isn't ever accessed again. Meh. The continued distribution is concerning, though I understand its purpose, and I presume there are reasonable safeguards in place such that the value in catching new suspects is higher than the harm done to the victims.
        adventured 11y ago
        The only example I'm aware of, regarding your claim about the FBI operating a site for months, was not in fact the FBI continuing to operate a CP site. In that instance, they kept allowing attempts at signing up to access CP, they did not keep allowing access to the content; the FBI clarified that point when the story came out.
        FireBeyond 11y ago
        I appreciate the clarification - I was not aware of that detail, which is an important distinction to make.
        EdHominem 11y ago
        I wasn't referring to the quantity of illegal images, merely that the FBI had burned its credibility by playing with the NSA: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/nsa-dea-fbi-snowden-doj-oig/ http://www.dailydot.com/politics/nsa-dea-fbi-snowden-doj-oig... At that, one has to assume that they "planted" the image in question because they've proven their willingness to play dirty.
- godgod 11y ago
  > It would be irresponsible and neglectful for law enforcement not to raid this man's home. Common sense doesn't dictate a "RAID" here. A simple knock and a 2 minute conversation would suffice. No need to kick down a door at 6am for something simple. People get shot that way.
sheepleherd 11y ago
um, no? they raided his house because of child pornography. that he had a Tor node and that fact got him off the hook is the part that needs more analysis. How do we know he doesn't operate the node for the very purpose of watching kiddy porn go by? Shouldn't everybody interested in child pornography operate their own exit node just for this purpose? Keep the kiddy porn collection in RAM for viewing whenever, then give the police the in-RAM-kiddy-porn-deleter password... I understand that ghkbrew (and MANY other people here, not picking on you) subscribe to the idea that there should be untraceable currency, perfect privacy delivery mechanisms, etc. But there are other people who live in the same democratic country that like the idea that somebody who bombthreats can be found. I understand the issues on both sides, and I don't mind there is a spectrum of beliefs and a discussion. But it's so annoying when people write posts slanted like yours that they don't acknowledge the obvious "other side". I read/heard something that David Mamet said, that he learned from the study of Jewish law (but it would apply everywhere) that in order for you to have the basis to discuss an argument with the other side, you need to be able to state the other side's argument in a way that the other side would not disagree with, then you get to make your point. I thought that was a nice idea.
- Zigurd 11y ago
  >How do we know he doesn't operate the node for the very purpose of watching kiddy porn go by?" To support a warrant, the question has to be the other way around. As with any activity the could be in proximity to illegal activity, it's not, by itself, evidence of anything.
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    Tor network has only become "a thing" (as opposed to US military toy) only in the last few years. Half a decade ago such a log the police saw would probably be a clear-cut case of someone downloading or uploading child porn on the guy's network. Even with Tor being available, it's still worth checking out.
    - Zigurd 11y ago
      If they were that incompetent about computers they had no business running their own cp investigation. They would have mishandled evidence. They should have handed it off to the state police or the FBI. Alternatively they could have just been bunch of dicks out to intimidate someone.
smhenderson 11y ago
Well this part is still very troubling. Yes, only speculation, but informed and reasonable speculation none the less... Given his early morning wake-up call last week and the fact that he may now have to get rid of his computers because he can't be sure what the police did to them while he was being questioned outside his apartment, Robinson says he may have to reassess whether it's practical for him to stand on that principle.

by ghkbrew 11y ago

Laaw 11y ago

But it does give a judge something to point at and be like, "Why couldn't you do it here (in a different situation) like you did over there (this situation)?" Not much, admittedly, but it's something.

techthroway443 11y ago

It's not worrying at all. Running a Tor exit node in itself isn't a problem. The problem arises when the exit node operator knowingly is giving up control over the traffic going through his connection. If you run a tor exit node you need to accept the fact there is a chance something illegal is passing through and that when it happens (as it did here) you are going to get investigated. It would be irresponsible and neglectful for law enforcement not to raid this man's home.

EdHominem 11y ago
They probably sent the picture in the first place.
- peppaz 11y ago
  This probably isn't wrong, the FBI is the largest holder of CP in the world, last time it was reported on.
  - Godel_unicode 11y ago
    They have copies of CP collected as evidence, therefore they are distributing it? By this logic, the DEA evidence locker might make them the biggest crack dealer in the US.
    - FireBeyond 11y ago
      The FBI has, on multiple admitted occasions, ran both honeypots for CP, and on seizing a CP site, continued to run it for multiple months to get more suspects. I have no issue with the intent, and such things are - in a restricted manner - allowed for, see prostitution stings. But the fact that they -do- distribute CP is verifiable fact.
      - lotharbot 11y ago
        and the fact that they hold large amounts of CP -- which is the wording the prior post used -- is also verifiable fact. I'm not even concerned that they hold it. Sometimes it's evidence. Sometimes it can be used to identify and rescue victims. Sometimes it just goes in a database and isn't ever accessed again. Meh. The continued distribution is concerning, though I understand its purpose, and I presume there are reasonable safeguards in place such that the value in catching new suspects is higher than the harm done to the victims.
      - adventured 11y ago
        The only example I'm aware of, regarding your claim about the FBI operating a site for months, was not in fact the FBI continuing to operate a CP site. In that instance, they kept allowing attempts at signing up to access CP, they did not keep allowing access to the content; the FBI clarified that point when the story came out.
        FireBeyond 11y ago
        I appreciate the clarification - I was not aware of that detail, which is an important distinction to make.
        EdHominem 11y ago
        I wasn't referring to the quantity of illegal images, merely that the FBI had burned its credibility by playing with the NSA: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/nsa-dea-fbi-snowden-doj-oig/ http://www.dailydot.com/politics/nsa-dea-fbi-snowden-doj-oig... At that, one has to assume that they "planted" the image in question because they've proven their willingness to play dirty.
godgod 11y ago
> It would be irresponsible and neglectful for law enforcement not to raid this man's home. Common sense doesn't dictate a "RAID" here. A simple knock and a 2 minute conversation would suffice. No need to kick down a door at 6am for something simple. People get shot that way.

sheepleherd 11y ago

um, no? they raided his house because of child pornography. that he had a Tor node and that fact got him off the hook is the part that needs more analysis. How do we know he doesn't operate the node for the very purpose of watching kiddy porn go by? Shouldn't everybody interested in child pornography operate their own exit node just for this purpose? Keep the kiddy porn collection in RAM for viewing whenever, then give the police the in-RAM-kiddy-porn-deleter password... I understand that ghkbrew (and MANY other people here, not picking on you) subscribe to the idea that there should be untraceable currency, perfect privacy delivery mechanisms, etc. But there are other people who live in the same democratic country that like the idea that somebody who bombthreats can be found. I understand the issues on both sides, and I don't mind there is a spectrum of beliefs and a discussion. But it's so annoying when people write posts slanted like yours that they don't acknowledge the obvious "other side". I read/heard something that David Mamet said, that he learned from the study of Jewish law (but it would apply everywhere) that in order for you to have the basis to discuss an argument with the other side, you need to be able to state the other side's argument in a way that the other side would not disagree with, then you get to make your point. I thought that was a nice idea.

Zigurd 11y ago
>How do we know he doesn't operate the node for the very purpose of watching kiddy porn go by?" To support a warrant, the question has to be the other way around. As with any activity the could be in proximity to illegal activity, it's not, by itself, evidence of anything.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  Tor network has only become "a thing" (as opposed to US military toy) only in the last few years. Half a decade ago such a log the police saw would probably be a clear-cut case of someone downloading or uploading child porn on the guy's network. Even with Tor being available, it's still worth checking out.
  - Zigurd 11y ago
    If they were that incompetent about computers they had no business running their own cp investigation. They would have mishandled evidence. They should have handed it off to the state police or the FBI. Alternatively they could have just been bunch of dicks out to intimidate someone.

smhenderson 11y ago

Well this part is still very troubling. Yes, only speculation, but informed and reasonable speculation none the less... Given his early morning wake-up call last week and the fact that he may now have to get rid of his computers because he can't be sure what the police did to them while he was being questioned outside his apartment, Robinson says he may have to reassess whether it's practical for him to stand on that principle.