3 ms·

I'm all for privacy technologies like Tor, but this is one of the risks you assume when you operate an exit node. The alternative would be to give all Tor exit

I'm all for privacy technologies like Tor, but this is one of the risks you assume when you operate an exit node. The alternative would be to give all Tor exit node operators not only legal immunity, but immunity from investigation, for illegal activities originating from any IP address associated with them. Even if the judge and the police were aware of the exit node, it wouldn't have changed the way this was investigated.

imchillyb 11y ago
You jest about immunity, but... We don't prosecute the Department of Transportation when someone transports several hundred million dollars of cocaine across their roads. Why should we treat digital highways, overpasses, and offramps, any differently?
- downandout 11y ago
  This isn't even close to a reasonable comparison. Until it can be investigated, the only available suspect in a case where illegal activity originates from a given home user's IP is that user. The DOT isn't the sole operator and user of the roads it builds.
  - rev_bird 11y ago
    >The DOT isn't the sole operator and user of the roads it builds. An exit node operator isn't the sole user of the IP address they're assigned either. Yes, they're the only available suspect, but that doesn't change the fact that it's based on outrageously flawed evidence -- it's basically one step up from a hunch, and I don't think it's nearly good enough to be kicking someone's door in.
AnthonyMouse 11y ago
Suppose I'm AT&T and one of my customers is running a Tor exit node. Do I now have "immunity from investigation, for illegal activities originating from any IP address associated with them"? I can certainly use a router spoof my customer's IP address for any connections I want to use for illegal activity. Then the IP address will trace back to that customer, which is a Tor exit node, and the police can't investigate me. For that matter, every user of Tor is in the same situation. But the premise is wrong. The police can investigate you as much as they like, they just can't assume that the traffic coming from that IP address has anything to do with anyone in particular. You're still going to jail when you buy something with a stolen credit card and have it shipped to your house, regardless of whether you used Tor or operated a Tor exit node or are an ISP and used an IP address assigned to a customer.
- downandout 11y ago
  >Suppose I'm AT&T ISPs have a specific set of statutes that grant them immunity as long as they comply with certain requirements [1]. Individual users do not. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2258B https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2258B
  - MertsA 11y ago
    In practice some individuals do have immunity. If this case led the detectives to a local coffee shop do you really think they would have raided the owner's house at 6am and ransacked his home and business searching for something that they knew they were unlikely to find? It's not really that different from running a Tor exit node. The police knew that the traffic was likely coming from another source and that the most likely outcome was that the Tor node operator had no way of potentially knowing that anything illegal had even happened. How does that equate to probable cause to raid his house?
    - downandout 11y ago
      The coffee shop owner probably wouldn't be prosecuted, but he would likely still be investigated.
      - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
        Then why shouldn't AT&T be investigated?
      - MertsA 11y ago
        Yes, up until it comes to light that there is very little reason to believe that the owner is guilty. More importantly though they wouldn't handcuff him and trash his business when there's clearly no probable cause to do so.
  - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
    How is it that Tor node operator is not "an electronic communication service provider [or] a remote computing service provider"?

imchillyb 11y ago

You jest about immunity, but... We don't prosecute the Department of Transportation when someone transports several hundred million dollars of cocaine across their roads. Why should we treat digital highways, overpasses, and offramps, any differently?

downandout 11y ago
This isn't even close to a reasonable comparison. Until it can be investigated, the only available suspect in a case where illegal activity originates from a given home user's IP is that user. The DOT isn't the sole operator and user of the roads it builds.
- rev_bird 11y ago
  >The DOT isn't the sole operator and user of the roads it builds. An exit node operator isn't the sole user of the IP address they're assigned either. Yes, they're the only available suspect, but that doesn't change the fact that it's based on outrageously flawed evidence -- it's basically one step up from a hunch, and I don't think it's nearly good enough to be kicking someone's door in.

AnthonyMouse 11y ago

Suppose I'm AT&T and one of my customers is running a Tor exit node. Do I now have "immunity from investigation, for illegal activities originating from any IP address associated with them"? I can certainly use a router spoof my customer's IP address for any connections I want to use for illegal activity. Then the IP address will trace back to that customer, which is a Tor exit node, and the police can't investigate me. For that matter, every user of Tor is in the same situation. But the premise is wrong. The police can investigate you as much as they like, they just can't assume that the traffic coming from that IP address has anything to do with anyone in particular. You're still going to jail when you buy something with a stolen credit card and have it shipped to your house, regardless of whether you used Tor or operated a Tor exit node or are an ISP and used an IP address assigned to a customer.

downandout 11y ago
>Suppose I'm AT&T ISPs have a specific set of statutes that grant them immunity as long as they comply with certain requirements [1]. Individual users do not. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2258B https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2258B
- MertsA 11y ago
  In practice some individuals do have immunity. If this case led the detectives to a local coffee shop do you really think they would have raided the owner's house at 6am and ransacked his home and business searching for something that they knew they were unlikely to find? It's not really that different from running a Tor exit node. The police knew that the traffic was likely coming from another source and that the most likely outcome was that the Tor node operator had no way of potentially knowing that anything illegal had even happened. How does that equate to probable cause to raid his house?
  - downandout 11y ago
    The coffee shop owner probably wouldn't be prosecuted, but he would likely still be investigated.
    - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
      Then why shouldn't AT&T be investigated?
    - MertsA 11y ago
      Yes, up until it comes to light that there is very little reason to believe that the owner is guilty. More importantly though they wouldn't handcuff him and trash his business when there's clearly no probable cause to do so.
- AnthonyMouse 11y ago
  How is it that Tor node operator is not "an electronic communication service provider [or] a remote computing service provider"?