Man Found Guilty of Child Porn, Because He Ran a Tor Exit Node
Man Found Guilty of Child Porn, Because He Ran a Tor Exit Node
Guns. Drugs. TOR. Child pornography. The long and twisted tale of LowEndTalk's famous member William goes deep.
Man Found Guilty of Child Porn, Because He Ran a Tor Exit Node::undefined
You're viewing a single thread.
They convicted him on "supporting the transfer of underage pornography", i.e. he ran an exit node that "allowed" the upload of CP to an Austrian image hoster. Apparently, he wasn't protected because he ran the exit as an individual, not a registered company. Most likely, the Austrian authority checked who uploaded the images, and found his IP address, which became the basis for convicting him. He didn't have any of the materials because all those stuffs were encrypted in transit.
He mentioned that law that was used to prosecute him was changed a few weeks later to protect individuals as well. He apparently now ran Tor exits under an offshore company.
In summary, from what he said, he just happened to run an unrestricted exit node that some people used to upload CP.
In summary, from what he said, he just happened to run an unrestricted exit node that some people used to upload CP.
I mean... that is the big issue with things like tor and the decentralized youtube alternative everyone wants.
You either need INCREDIBLY strict moderation, or you actually think it is sane to say things like "he just happened to run an unrestricted exit node that some people used to upload CP"
Tools like tor are INCREDIBLY useful for avoiding government suppression (even if there are quite a few questions regarding how private things actually are and how easy it is to compromise...). But I personally can't support anything where "Oh well, I guess I accidentally supported the proliferation of CSAM".
Like, the joke back in the day was always that if you ran an unsecured FTP server, russian porn would magically appear. And I knew a few people in undergrad who did that because of "the lolz". And then they actually saw what was on their server and pretty much burned those drives and never went back. And while there are theoretical benefits to having public usable drop sites with minimal tracking... I am gonna more than side eye anyone who knowingly does that.
I mean… that is the big issue with things like tor and the decentralized youtube alternative everyone wants.
This is an issue on Lemmy as well, one that very few so far seem to have wisened up to. If you host a server and federate it, your server will pull, store and display the content your users are watching for all to see. So you could be on the hook for distributing illegal material if you don't preemptively defederate from instances potentially hosting content that is illegal for you to possess.
Yup. Can't find it any more, but one of the bigger instances apparently defederated from lemmynsfw over that. Not at all surprised since I think I first knew they existed when the admin (?) made that post that could be summed up as "Okay, I know I said we would allow all the loli hentai out there but a bunch of people called me a pedophile so we aren't doing that anymore". Didn't really check back in, but sounds like they continued that boundary pushing and the folk who would have called Chris Hansen noped out already.
And that is really the problem. Moderation is a thankless and incredibly time consuming job to begin with. NSFW content is a multiplier on the time and psychic damage while also meaning you have almost zero chance of monetizing that to justify a second job. So you tend to get the same crowd who are 'free speech absolutists" and don't really understand what they are getting in to.
It sucks because... porn is awesome. But people are crazy for getting involved with any "decentralized" service where they are storing content they themselves did not actively curate.
This is it: https://lemmynsfw.com/post/418317
This is it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/1204784
I mean you could say the same thing about any entity hosting public wifi, but I doubt the local cafe owner has to worry when someone breaks the law on their guest network.
This feels really inconsistent is the main problem.
I mean, they do. DMCA "requests" go to the ISP and the customer and that is just as easily a starbucks as it is a residential home.
And I speak from (my niece's) experience: Cops have no problems walking up to the counter in the middle of lunch, forcing their way past all the customers, and very loudly telling the pimply faced teenager that they need to speak with the manager about a child porn investigation. I was not privy to the actual discussions but... they lost a lot of business that day and, when I go back to visit family, I still hear that coffee shop referred to as "the pedophile place".
This is WHY any sane public wifi is behind a captive portal and likely has a LOT of security and spyware running in the background.
dude is innocent man.
Stupidity or ignorance of the law does not make you innocent. Great though the guy was for running a tor node, he did not realize what liability he set himself up for. Unfortunate and I feel for the guy, but he was technically guilty and that's all that matters in the court of law.
I mean he's not. He did literally allow CP to be uploaded. And he literally wasn't legally protected.
But it's kind of like arresting the gas station owner for allowing a drug deal in his parking lot.
Kind of crazy how unsympathetic people are being towards Tor and Tor operators here
But I personally can't support anything where "Oh well, I guess I accidentally supported the proliferation of CSAM".
Does this mean you're opposed to, say, roads, because they can be used to transport child porn? How about postal services—they'll even pick it up and deliver it wherever you want!
Does he/people get paid for running the exit node?
There are 7,000+ Tor relays, and 2,000+ bridges being run by entities including individuals, orgs, corporations, and most likely governments. (https://metrics.torproject.org/networksize.html) So, the answer is yes, no, and something in between. He himself didn't say, but the article portrayed him as being an individual who believed in free speech, an activity which Tor does help support.