Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

geekslop.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 185 posts

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#61

Post by chimeracoder »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #51
ThomPete wrote: post #43

Maybe it's just me but I don't really like the tendency to treat pedophiles as if they are the devils themselves. Let there be no doubt. I have two kids and there is probably no limit to what I would do to someone who did anything to my kids. But it's not as simply as just condemning pedophiles for being that and I ultimately think there is something morally or ethically questionable about this approach. It's fairly…

The war on drugs didn't work out as intended. The war on pedophilia seems much safer. Except of course for teenage sexting. Where the legal system has ruined lives for no reason. Or the weird edge cases it introduces. Such as a theoretical case where someone wearing Go Pro comes across a pedophile actively abusing a child out in the wild. The good samaritan Go Pro wearer is now guilty of both production and possessio…

> The war on drugs didn't work out as intended. The war on pedophilia seems much safer.

We don't have a war on pedophilia. We have a war on "child pornography". I put "child pornography" in scare quotes because it's abundantly clear that many of the laws that aim to target child pornography really only use it as a bogeyman to obscure some other agenda.

Also, as for "safer", whatever we're doing now is clearly putting children at risk. In many countries (including the US), pedophilia is exempt from typical confidentiality laws regarding mental illnesses[0]. This makes pedophiles less likely to seek professional help, and I can only imagine that this means that they are more likely to harm or abuse a child.

[0] https://medium.com/matter/youre-16-youre-a-pedophile-you-don...

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#62

Post by rnovak »

jrcii wrote: post #10
sarahj wrote: post #7

Some of the technical points of this article are simply wrong... > The exit node IP address of the user was easily obtained using the two different methods discussed briefly above. This is really not a vulnerability but simply how tor, and the internet at large, works - hidden services by design protect the service not the user (the user is protected by tor by default) - what the author actually did here was "leak" t…

The author appears to believe that "Tor is the devil" because "4,000-5,000 hidden services are running at any given time. Secondly, the content served by these sites is almost universally illegal or immoral (by my definition anyway). A conservative estimate would be maybe 1 out of 200 or so hidden service websites contain content I would deem worthy of the protection an anonymous network provides. Sites featuring fre…

Except that the approach the author used is in my opinion completely flawed.

The author states he started from 1 (one) seed URL, and then crawled the sites, visiting links. But that's not valid, as you'd only ever come across a possible fraction of what exists.

To be able to make any authoritative claim, he would need to scan the entire IP-space, like an actual search engine would.

I'm not condoning pedophelia or anything like it, but I think it's naive to take a simple approach and then make authoritative claims about the entirety of the TOR network.

But I also think that there were flagrant abuses that could be pursued under the CFAA. Just because something isn't "per se" malware doesn't mean it wouldn't fit the legal definition.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#63

Post by ThomPete »

allendoerfer wrote: post #56
ThomPete wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe a few but he is also hurting someone who might just be watching and could destroy their lives completely. As I said it's not that simple. I find it all disgusting but these people need help not traps. They are humans not animals despite what we think of some of their actions.

There is no "just be watching". If you watch a child getting raped, you are committing a crime and better have a very convincing argument why you had to do it. It is in fact that simple. Of course they need help, too. We need both prosecution and prevention.

You will get quite a different punishment for watching child porn than from raping a kid. So yes there is "just watching" That doesn't make it less disgusting but it's not the same.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#64

Post by argumentum »

tdy721 wrote: post #57
ThomPete wrote: post #43

Maybe it's just me but I don't really like the tendency to treat pedophiles as if they are the devils themselves. Let there be no doubt. I have two kids and there is probably no limit to what I would do to someone who did anything to my kids. But it's not as simply as just condemning pedophiles for being that and I ultimately think there is something morally or ethically questionable about this approach. It's fairly…

I am normally a pretty level dude, but in this case I really do believe we are dealing with something supernaturally evil. This isn't snooping on randoms, it's exposing demons for what they are. (Atheist, but science just doesn't have the words for this.)

A a fellow atheist, I agree that evil is a real thing, but I still don't see the need to call it "supernatural".

Evil is the opposite of good, so if we agree that actions to promote life, liberty and happiness are good, then actions that promote death, slavery and misery are evil. Simple as that.

So there's plenty of evil in nature.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#65

Post by deciplex »

tdy721 wrote: post #57
ThomPete wrote: post #43

Maybe it's just me but I don't really like the tendency to treat pedophiles as if they are the devils themselves. Let there be no doubt. I have two kids and there is probably no limit to what I would do to someone who did anything to my kids. But it's not as simply as just condemning pedophiles for being that and I ultimately think there is something morally or ethically questionable about this approach. It's fairly…

I am normally a pretty level dude, but in this case I really do believe we are dealing with something supernaturally evil. This isn't snooping on randoms, it's exposing demons for what they are. (Atheist, but science just doesn't have the words for this.)

I'm pretty sure science has the words for it. Also, supernatural things, by definition, do not exist. Pedophiles unfortunately do exist.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#66

Post by ikeboy »

api wrote: post #55
ThomPete wrote: post #43

Maybe it's just me but I don't really like the tendency to treat pedophiles as if they are the devils themselves. Let there be no doubt. I have two kids and there is probably no limit to what I would do to someone who did anything to my kids. But it's not as simply as just condemning pedophiles for being that and I ultimately think there is something morally or ethically questionable about this approach. It's fairly…

I disagree, and I think the problem is the framing. Call it rape porn, because it is. What would you think of someone trading files like "REAL video of ISIS soldiers gang raping and beheading girl!" Child porn, especially the "hard core" sort alluded to here, is in the same category. I do dislike the OP's guilt by association and vigilantism though. There's a reason we have a proper justice system. Imagine if someone…

The obvious counterpoint is that beheading videos are legal to watch.

The last time this came up on HN that I remember, someone linked to these posts by Rick Falkvinge:

https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-mu...

https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/11/child-porn-laws-arent-as-ba...

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#67

Post by wstrange »

allendoerfer wrote: post #56
ThomPete wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe a few but he is also hurting someone who might just be watching and could destroy their lives completely. As I said it's not that simple. I find it all disgusting but these people need help not traps. They are humans not animals despite what we think of some of their actions.

There is no "just be watching". If you watch a child getting raped, you are committing a crime and better have a very convincing argument why you had to do it. It is in fact that simple. Of course they need help, too. We need both prosecution and prevention.

If watching a crime is a criminal offence, you better lock up the viewers of CNN, Fox News, and the BBC.

I do think their ought to be laws against the distribution of this kind of material (there probably are?), and there is no question that producing it is a criminal offence, and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#68

Post by adventured »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #51
ThomPete wrote: post #43

Maybe it's just me but I don't really like the tendency to treat pedophiles as if they are the devils themselves. Let there be no doubt. I have two kids and there is probably no limit to what I would do to someone who did anything to my kids. But it's not as simply as just condemning pedophiles for being that and I ultimately think there is something morally or ethically questionable about this approach. It's fairly…

The war on drugs didn't work out as intended. The war on pedophilia seems much safer. Except of course for teenage sexting. Where the legal system has ruined lives for no reason. Or the weird edge cases it introduces. Such as a theoretical case where someone wearing Go Pro comes across a pedophile actively abusing a child out in the wild. The good samaritan Go Pro wearer is now guilty of both production and possessio…

800,000 people in the US are now on the sex offenders registry [1]. I think it has become clear to at least half the nation that the laws have gone too far on things like teen sexting or getting put on the registry for public urination.

A friend of mine, her boyfriend is a trucker. He had pulled over to urinate along the side of the highway late at night, in the shadow cover of his truck. A state trooper had pulled over a speeding vehicle, a distance behind him along the road. The trooper proceeded to then pull in behind the trucker, and threatened to put him on the sex offender's registry for public urination; the trooper spent 10 minutes reaming him out for it before letting him go.

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/us/teenagers-jailing-bring...

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#69

Post by Systemist »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #51
ThomPete wrote: post #43

Maybe it's just me but I don't really like the tendency to treat pedophiles as if they are the devils themselves. Let there be no doubt. I have two kids and there is probably no limit to what I would do to someone who did anything to my kids. But it's not as simply as just condemning pedophiles for being that and I ultimately think there is something morally or ethically questionable about this approach. It's fairly…

The war on drugs didn't work out as intended. The war on pedophilia seems much safer. Except of course for teenage sexting. Where the legal system has ruined lives for no reason. Or the weird edge cases it introduces. Such as a theoretical case where someone wearing Go Pro comes across a pedophile actively abusing a child out in the wild. The good samaritan Go Pro wearer is now guilty of both production and possessio…

That you can read the law such that your hypothetical Go Pro wearer is guilty of those things, doesn't mean that prosecutors would ever bring such a case. Laws are drawn more broadly than they're enforced, and even an overzealous prosecutor has to get through a judge and jury.
Post reply on HN