5 ms·

> FBI opreated 23 Tor-hidden child porn sites Uh, what? I don't think the end justifies the means here

by forthwoart 10y ago

foobarbecue 10y ago
You might want to read beyond the clickbait headline.
- GrinningFool 10y ago
  "“I would refer you to public documents on the Playpen investigation, in which we seized and operated a darkweb child pornography site for a period of less than two weeks,” That reads to me like yes, they were running the fully operational CP sites and allowing it to continue to serve up CP. The ends do not justify the means. ANd nobody has raised the question of how this can actually be done legally - under current law is there a way to make the serving up of CP content a sufficiently grey area that it's permissible to do with only judicial approval? If not, seems to me the individuals managing the site for the window of federal operations have the potential to be in a whole mess of trouble. If so, that seems a thing that should be fixed.
centizen 10y ago
Out of context this sounds much worse than it is - the FBI forcefully took control of a hosting network that included 23 child-porn service sites. They then used it as a platform to serve malware to the visitors of the sites. Within a month, they shut down the websites.
- mikeash 10y ago
  If the FBI seized a store that sold illegal drugs, and kept operating the stores and selling illegal drugs for a month afterwards, would that be considered OK? I'm not getting hugely up in arms about this, but it doesn't seem right.
  - rz2k 10y ago
    What if it were controlling a kingpin for a month in order to identify multiple lower levels of distributors and dealers? I believe that consumers of child pornography are considered likely participants in the further trade of material and creators of more content than the typical drug user is.
    - mikeash 10y ago
      It seems to me that allowing a criminal to continue committing crimes is different from taking ownership of a server and continuing to operate it. The criminal has agency, while the server does not. But it's not entirely clear cut, for sure.
    - nommm-nommm 10y ago
      Correct me if I am wrong but isn't that basically what they did with Sabu?
  - mattzito 10y ago
    I mean, they do this - it's not uncommon to bust a drug dealer, and then allow them to continue operating as an informant so they can monitor their activities.
    - ethanbond 10y ago
      Yeah, this shit happens all the time. How do you people think law enforcement operates against criminal networks? Infiltrate, quietly gather evidence, then prosecute. The "gather evidence" portion often involves allowing people to do incriminating things, especially since, you know, being about to do an illegal thing isn't illegal (usually).
      - xtian 10y ago
        The question is whether this is how we want law enforcement to operate in our society. And in the process of answering that question we should probably ask, "is it working?"
- danjoc 10y ago
  >FBI Special Agent Jeff Tarpinian admitted in court that the agency “relocated two servers to an FBI facility here in Omaha and we continued to let those child pornography run" http://disinfo.com/2016/01/why-did-the-fbi-operate-a-child-porn-site/ http://disinfo.com/2016/01/why-did-the-fbi-operate-a-child-p... In context, it sounds even harder to justify.
  - openasocket 10y ago
    This article is about Freedom Hosting, that link is talking about Operation Pacifier. Those are two completely different operations that took places years apart, by different agents.
    - danjoc 10y ago
      It seems that was a very slippery slope then.

> FBI opreated 23 Tor-hidden child porn sites Uh, what? I don't think the end justifies the means here

foobarbecue 10y ago

You might want to read beyond the clickbait headline.

GrinningFool 10y ago
"“I would refer you to public documents on the Playpen investigation, in which we seized and operated a darkweb child pornography site for a period of less than two weeks,” That reads to me like yes, they were running the fully operational CP sites and allowing it to continue to serve up CP. The ends do not justify the means. ANd nobody has raised the question of how this can actually be done legally - under current law is there a way to make the serving up of CP content a sufficiently grey area that it's permissible to do with only judicial approval? If not, seems to me the individuals managing the site for the window of federal operations have the potential to be in a whole mess of trouble. If so, that seems a thing that should be fixed.

centizen 10y ago

Out of context this sounds much worse than it is - the FBI forcefully took control of a hosting network that included 23 child-porn service sites. They then used it as a platform to serve malware to the visitors of the sites. Within a month, they shut down the websites.

mikeash 10y ago
If the FBI seized a store that sold illegal drugs, and kept operating the stores and selling illegal drugs for a month afterwards, would that be considered OK? I'm not getting hugely up in arms about this, but it doesn't seem right.
- rz2k 10y ago
  What if it were controlling a kingpin for a month in order to identify multiple lower levels of distributors and dealers? I believe that consumers of child pornography are considered likely participants in the further trade of material and creators of more content than the typical drug user is.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    It seems to me that allowing a criminal to continue committing crimes is different from taking ownership of a server and continuing to operate it. The criminal has agency, while the server does not. But it's not entirely clear cut, for sure.
  - nommm-nommm 10y ago
    Correct me if I am wrong but isn't that basically what they did with Sabu?
- mattzito 10y ago
  I mean, they do this - it's not uncommon to bust a drug dealer, and then allow them to continue operating as an informant so they can monitor their activities.
  - ethanbond 10y ago
    Yeah, this shit happens all the time. How do you people think law enforcement operates against criminal networks? Infiltrate, quietly gather evidence, then prosecute. The "gather evidence" portion often involves allowing people to do incriminating things, especially since, you know, being about to do an illegal thing isn't illegal (usually).
    - xtian 10y ago
      The question is whether this is how we want law enforcement to operate in our society. And in the process of answering that question we should probably ask, "is it working?"
danjoc 10y ago
>FBI Special Agent Jeff Tarpinian admitted in court that the agency “relocated two servers to an FBI facility here in Omaha and we continued to let those child pornography run" http://disinfo.com/2016/01/why-did-the-fbi-operate-a-child-porn-site/ http://disinfo.com/2016/01/why-did-the-fbi-operate-a-child-p... In context, it sounds even harder to justify.
- openasocket 10y ago
  This article is about Freedom Hosting, that link is talking about Operation Pacifier. Those are two completely different operations that took places years apart, by different agents.
  - danjoc 10y ago
    It seems that was a very slippery slope then.