Euthanize everyone over 40.
Even those of us that know how to (and even do) operate a tor node?
Only if you wrote 8086 assembler on an original IBM PC.
Judge Who Authorized Police Search of Privacy Activists Wasn't Told About Tor
141–150 of 236 posts
Re: Judge Who Authorized Police Search of Privacy Activists Wasn't Told About Tor
#142If my job requires me to have an understanding of something new, I learn it. Like an adult. Why the hell is technology the only exception for people on this front?
If you're referring to the quote at the bottom of the article, that's from a different judge than the one who signed-off on this warrant.
In any case, the judge involved didn't have an opportunity to research "Tor exit node", even assuming he is the most competent and responsible judge in Seattle, because that information wasn't included on the warrant. That's... kind of the exact point of the article.
Re: Judge Who Authorized Police Search of Privacy Activists Wasn't Told About Tor
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is so much explaining going on here that it seems like the judge has no understanding of how the internet works. If that's the case, how could the judge be able to give a reasonable response to this affidavit? Seems like a case that requires such a long-winded technical preface could at least be handled by a judge who knows what an IP address is...
Most of the text in the warrant appears to be boilerplate language that is legally required or at least legally advisable in case it is ever challenged in court. I'm sure FBI agents have template word documents they keep, detailing their experience and relevant basic facts about each kind of case and then they just fill in the blanks when they have a case of that genre. This way no one can argue that the judge was no…
Yes, about 90% of this affidavit is fill-in-the-blanks boilerplate.
Re: Judge Who Authorized Police Search of Privacy Activists Wasn't Told About Tor
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would it / they / we? From what I've seen, the tech community (on the whole, averaged) isn't great at synthesizing and communicating information to non-technical people.
the same non technical people whose eyes glaze over and change the subject first chance they get ?
"Oh, I don't understand computers."
To be fair, I rarely understand what they do even if it's rather mundane. I do like to hear passionate people talk and see them work, but I admit that my curiosity is higher than most.
Re: Judge Who Authorized Police Search of Privacy Activists Wasn't Told About Tor
#145The warrant is ridiculous even without the tor part. Read pages #6 and #7. http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2016/04/08/1460... ISPs maintain hash values of known child porn files? Show me a single ISP in the Seattle area that runs any of its residential customer http traffic through a caching proxy that examines and hashes each file, I'll eat my shoe.
There's no need for a caching proxy for this, Bro IDS will do this out of the box if you drop the hashes in it's intel framework
Re: Judge Who Authorized Police Search of Privacy Activists Wasn't Told About Tor
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea but that means you have to spend extra money to run a Tor node, again limiting the amount of nodes that people are willing to run. The solution is for more people to run Tor, not fewer. Same with open Wifi nodes, the more the safer.
If you want to contribute with your home broadband connection, a bridge relay is more appropriate. You can run an exit relay for as little as $5/mo with a VPS.
99% of all VPS providers (in the $5/mo category, not $75/mo) will kill your account for running an exit node. They do not want their blocks of ARIN, RIPE or APNIC ipv4 space listed in every abuse and spam swamp realtime black hole list in existence.
Re: Judge Who Authorized Police Search of Privacy Activists Wasn't Told About Tor
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that most of the content on Tor is illegal,[1] I'm not sure the mail is really the appropriate analogy. [1] https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/02/survey_of_the...
I don't know why you wouldn't link directly to the paper, unless you're hoping that Schneier acknowledging its existence lends it some credibility. > most of the content Easily refuted: the authors had a spider crawl hidden services, which is laughably stupid. They claimed that there where 5,205 hidden services, of which 1,547 hosted illegal content. Another study [1], one which actually took advantage of network sta…
[deleted]
Re: Judge Who Authorized Police Search of Privacy Activists Wasn't Told About Tor
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really shouldn't be illegal, it should be protected, like free speech, as noted in the article, "It's like raiding the mailman's house for delivering an illegal letter with no return address" In fact I think that's why they withheld the fact that he runs a TOR node from the judge.
Given that most of the content on Tor is illegal,[1] I'm not sure the mail is really the appropriate analogy. [1] https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/02/survey_of_the...
Most of the content stored on hidden services may very well be illegal but AFAIK most Tor traffic isn't for anything stored on Tor, it's for content on the internet at large. That's like saying that most PO boxes without a real name are used for illegal purposes. It may be true, but that's only part of the analogy. I'd say the analogy still stands.
Re: Judge Who Authorized Police Search of Privacy Activists Wasn't Told About Tor
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes, I know, but 1/1000 may be. what if it's loaded over http behind the scene without any display? still transmitted over your network. What if the site just got hacked?
Then those facts become part of the investigation. Having your computer searched doesn't mean you at guilty or even that you will be charged. It just means your machine is implicated in a crime.
The unfortunate reality is that if you become a suspect that is good enough to burn you at the stake for much of the population. The same with rape really. Once you've been a suspect or, even worse, accused you are basically screwed.
Re: Judge Who Authorized Police Search of Privacy Activists Wasn't Told About Tor
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
>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
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?