5 ms·
Once the OP has ramped up their business, they can have a discounted P2P offering where you use each other as exit nodes.
by hnav 3y ago
Once the OP has ramped up their business, they can have a discounted P2P offering where you use each other as exit nodes.
- hk__2 3y agoThat’s a very dangerous feature: what will happen when someone watch pedoporn using you as an exit node?
- lionkor 3y agoI've always wondered, is there no burden of proof on the prosecution to prove it was you, especially with a p2p VPN installed?
- orangea 3y agoI have no idea but maybe it would count as aiding and abetting.
- lionkor 3y agoThat's a really good point. It could be claimed that you must have known of the possibility and that you support it, etc
- belval 3y agoIn a perfect world for sure, but in practice if there is any rumor that something as socially toxic as that went through your network, ultimately your reputation is ruined regardless of the legal outcome.
- stronglikedan 3y agoNot to mention your bank account being ruined by defense attorneys.
- spurgu 3y agoWould you want to turn over your computer to a forensics expert to prove your innocence? I would hope that authorities at least would try to build an actual case against you and not just raid your home because of some fraudulent traffic from your IP. I might be too optimistic in that regard.
- BLKNSLVR 3y agoI can vouch for suspected fraudulent traffic being enough for authorities to warrant a raid.
- Forgeties79 3y agoI’m guessing you can’t elaborate lol
- BLKNSLVR 3y agoI'd like to write up the details sooner rather than later, and I've got pages of notes I've written, but 1: it makes me angry to think about it 2: I have other, positive things I'd rather do It took them 8 months to return the ~$10k of gear they "stole" from me, and they found nothing. No apology, no explanation of how I was somehow caught up in their data, just "come collect your stuff". Ironically, they traumatized my kids (I don't think they even did any background checks on me - I don't believe they even knew there were kids in the house before they barged in). Luckily my kids are resilient and we can sometimes even joke (bitterly) about it.
- genocidicbunny 3y agoIt would be a pyrrhic victory for you even if you prove it wasn't you that was downloading it. Your name is going to be in court documents associated with prosecution over csam or other illegal materials. This information will be easily found. If you're the first case of it's kind, you will also have to deal with whatever tales the media spins about this. If you're somewhere like Florida, you might end up with your photo next to a label of 'pedophile' being plastered publicly. A lot of people will simply see the headline, assume you're guilty and treat you as such. And a lot of people are willing to treat those they think are pedophiles very very badly (there was a case recently where a murderer serving life in jail killed his pedophile cellmate) Anyone that knows about this incident will probably never allow you to be around kids unattended, regardless of your innocence. You will be a social pariah. Innocent until proven guilty had to be enshrined in law because most people will treat you guilty until proven innocent, and they don't have much concern about forgetting the 'proven innocent' bit.
- thefounder 3y agoSo I guess it's time to disconnect from the internet, at least your PC b/c you can't be certain it's not used as a vpn/proxy service through an exploit or rough app.
- Cyph0n 3y agoNo need to even be in jail for that to happen: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/melbourne/article-12217413/Final-moments-Bradley-Lyons-life-tortured-Australian-Freedom-Fighters-chainsaw.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/melbourne/article-12217413/...
- TechBro8615 3y agoAs long as p2p exit nodes are relatively uncommon, it will be relatively unbelievable for you to claim that "someone else" was doing the illegal things on your network. But if p2p exit nodes were orders of magnitude more common, then the burden of proof would indisputably be the responsibility of the prosecutors, since anyone could credibly claim "someone else did it." And that's why this trope of "but what if someone does bad stuff on your network?!" is so frustratingly self-defeating: if everyone just ignored that risk, then everyone could have a p2p exit node, and the risk would be mitigated. It's a sort of prisoner's dilemma where nobody wants to be the early adopter of a system that would, on the whole, benefit all of us. A society is difficult to surveil when everyone uses Tor as both a client and an exit node, and onion routing is the default method of exchanging packets (some might say it should have been incorporated into the original design of the internet). So it's perhaps worth noting that adversaries of society, such as the NSA or FBI, have a great incentive to perpetuate fearmongering about p2p networks and the threat of "but whatabout muh criminals on muh network!" If you're reading this, maybe it's time to setup a Tor relay (with config flag `ExitRelay 1`).
- genocidicbunny 3y ago> But if p2p exit nodes were orders of magnitude more common, then the burden of proof would indisputably be the responsibility of the prosecutors, since anyone could credibly claim "someone else did it." I think I'm more cynical about our justice system, but the way I see it, this just gives them ammunition to go after anybody on a whim. Simply getting tangled up in the justice system, even if innocent, is an expensive and stressful thing. Most of us do not have the resources to just have a dedicated team of lawyers taking care of everything. So if everyone was running a Tor exit node, and it was known that there was CSAM accessed through some of them, an overzealous prosecutor could probably push through at least a search warrant of your computers because as a Tor exit node runner, there's a reasonable chance that CSAM was accessed via your node. You're not getting your stuff back for a while if that happens.
- TechBro8615 3y agoI agree, but that's why I labeled it a prisoner's dilemma. If literally everyone ran an exit node, then if prosecutors wanted to assume that any exit node facilitated the transfer of illegal material, then they would need to find other ways of proving criminality other than what packets were sent from your IP address. They can't seize everyone's hardware. If they wanted to obtain a warrant for you, they'd need more probable cause than "he's running an exit node" (because everyone runs an exit node). As it stands, there's already a certain level of injustice, because corporations like Google and Microsoft facilitate all sorts of illegal communications, and the worst that happens is they get a letter from the feds asking them nicely for their subscriber's information. The investigators don't jump to the conclusion that the CEO of Google is a child predator and seize all the Google servers. But for an independent system admin on a home network, that's exactly what they do, even though there's no fundamental difference other than the size of the operation (and the implicit assumption that exit relays are unusual, which is the unfair assumption I'm trying to draw attention to as an explanation for lack of plausible deniability on the part of the idealistic sysadmin in a world where exit nodes are unusual).
- Syonyk 3y agoIf you want the "full experience," just set yourself up as a Tor exit node. You'll rapidly find it's impossible to use the internet from the same connection. VPN services are more and more falling into the same category. Even just "cloud provider" IP ranges are broken often enough to be noticeable - I run an Outline VPN on DigitalOcean droplets every now and then, and I've found that that's enough to get me 403'd from a lot of sites. "Arrest first, deal with nerds protesting their innocence later" still involves getting arrested.
- pinkcan 3y agosuggest the use of the term Child Sexual Abuse Media - CSAM as it better describes the content and reflects the harm it causes
- hk__2 3y agothanks.
- codedokode 3y agoIf "children" make such media themselves, is it still considered an "abuse"?
- geraldyo 3y agoAmongst "children", no. If for an adult, yes...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- pinkcan 3y agoWhat are you trying to get at with this question, and how does it matter in the context of this thread? Are you asking about the consequences of breaking laws while using someone else's internet access as an exit point, or are you asking about the dynamics of CSAM production? _that comment is giving off really nasty vibes_
- r_lee 3y agoThis is what the "residential proxies" do. They push out a free VPN or buy out a game in the play/app store and integrate their p2p network on it, so that other people can then use your device as a proxy. Never ever would you want to pay to do that to yourself lol.