4 ms·
"The slapshot nature of how sites were seized suggests that rather than starting with an onion address and then discovering the host server to seize, this campa
by yc1010 12y ago
"The slapshot nature of how sites were seized suggests that rather than starting with an onion address and then discovering the host server to seize, this campaign simply vacuumed up a large number of onion websites by targeting specific hosting companies. We have tracked down the hosting companies affected and the details will be published in a follow-up."
Very interested to see the list of hosting companies that were targeted.
- nikcub 12y agoIt is the reason why we're asking for administrators of sites that were seized or those at hosting companies to come forward. Have already spoken to a number of people and got a full list of the hosts involved, but we need a secondary confirmation, or details we can make public, on some of sites and hosts. Looking at what the seized sites had in common, in terms of host, configuration, etc. narrows down the methods that might have been used to uncover the hidden sites and provides a clearer picture of what went on.
- cesarb 12y agoThe most interesting question to me would be, does this means that the server administrators now have a "get out of jail free card" due to the "fruit of the poisoned tree" doctrine or similar? Hosting a hidden service by itself does not mean doing something illegal, even Facebook hosts a hidden service nowadays. The only valid justification for the seizure would be if they had traced an illegal hidden service to that host, but from what I have read this seizure sounds too indiscriminate for that to be the case (IIRC even some pure relays, which don't host anything at all, were seized).
- forgottenpass 12y agoThe most interesting question to me would be, does this means that the server administrators now have a "get out of jail free card" due to the "fruit of the poisoned tree" doctrine or similar? That would require the defendant's rights to have been violated. I'm no doctor of law, but even if they were slipshod enough to violate rights in investigation regarding the datacenters, I'd be surprised if the defendants rights were the ones violated (3rd party doctrine and all).
- comboy 12y agoI'll just leave it here. For years I've never had any issues with hetzner (having few dedicated boxes in different DCs). Few weeks prior to seizure there were suprisingly long downtimes in a few DCs due to "router issues", and then some with kind of "power outage?". It is far fetched but if is anything close to truth I cannot imagine how US gov can influence company based in Germany so strongly that it would cost it a lot of reputation and lost clients.