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

81–90 of 185 posts

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#81

Post by forrestthewoods »

Systemist wrote: post #69
forrestthewoods wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Jury's often make immoral rulings because the law is the law as they're following instructions. Prosecutors are notorious for being overzealous shitbags. So that leaves the judge. They probably react fairly more often than not. Maybe even in the vast majority of cases. I wouldn't wager a single dollar, much less my freedom, on a judge acting fairly or rationally. Far too risky.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#83

Post by digler999 »

Systemist wrote: post #69
forrestthewoods wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> even an overzealous prosecutor has to get through a judge and jury.

No, what they do is threaten you with some hypothetical 30 year term if they were to charge you will all the broad interpretations of the law. This fear of hard time is then used as a carrot to get you to plead guilty to lesser charges that you may not have even done.

They get around the "judges" by the minimum sentencing laws: "sorry, my hands are tied, I have to lock you up for ____ years because I have to follow federal sentencing guidelines."

Furthermore, there is a huge incentive to prosecute "sex crimes" because that's a gold star for the prosecutor/judge. At the end of the year, or at election time they can say "We locked up N sex offenders this year for a combined total of X years".

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#84

Post by MichaelCrawford »

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…

The vast majority of illegal or immoral content is not encrypted in any way.

Giving the Finger to Vasha: Child Pornography on the Internet

http://www.warplife.com/jonathan-swift/books/software-proble...

A straightford way to find many of those who profit from its distribution would be to use a bot to locate forum threads that go on for hundreds of pages.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#85

Post by utuxia »

gizmo686 wrote: post #44
aftbit wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here you go, all Tor exit nodes: https://check.torproject.org/exit-addresses The Tor project does a lot of work to make operating an exit node safer and less likely to prompt the authorities to intervene. This is good, because even if the authorities did want to talk to exit node providers, those people _couldn't_ provide any useful logs.

Although they could be made to run a packet sniffer, which could provide useful information.

But the traffic between nodes is encrypted. All they may get is the previous node's IP address....then they have to start over. Go find that node operator and get them to do the same.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#86

Post by tedks »

rnovak wrote: post #62
jrcii wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 any…

You used to be able to set yourself up as an HSDir server, and sniff the outgoing hidden service descriptors, but the author has clearly not done this given his level of technical expertise and domain knowledge.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#87

Post by innguest »

allendoerfer wrote: post #71
wstrange wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Watching a report about a crime is not the same as consuming a product that was produced and shared or sold by the criminal that committed the crime. You are actively supporting the criminal, either through money or through community. On a different note: There is nothing wrong with regulating how footage of crimes can be shown to protect the victims and even the offenders. I know this argument is hard to make on HN,…

> There is nothing wrong with regulating how footage of crimes can be shown to protect the victims and even the offenders.

Right! That's how it starts. In the end we have "there's nothing wrong with censoring 28 pages of a 9/11 report to protect the security of all Americans because it doesn't really matter who funded it, the government told us who the bad people are so we don't really need to keep the government on check on this".

That sort of thinking ends really well. /s

Remember, the citizens hire the government. They work for us. Would you allow your employees to censor some parts of your financial reports?

Grow some principles. If people are sick that they need to look at sick images then offer to help them. Enabling tyrants does not help keep children safe. Incidentally, not spanking them does. If you really care about protecting children, get off your bureaucrat high horse and start helping educate people on the impact of spanking.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#88

Post by PhasmaFelis »

mikekchar wrote: post #75
dvt wrote: post #33

It seems like the author is emotionally invested in this topic: > Given my circumstances, I have seen first-hand, the psychological damage a pedophile’s actions cause. The damage done to these children is permanent and no matter how much counseling and assistance they seek – the experience is forever embedded into their self, shaping (and sometimes limiting) what they become as adults. I can't pretend like I really g…

I couldn't really finish reading the article. I hope the original author will realize that hanging on to his anger will only perpetuate the crimes committed against his daughter. His characterisation of permanent damage done to his daughter makes me wonder if she will ever be able to escape the trauma in his eyes . Will he be able to provide a safe place for her to go where people know about her past but care only ab…

So your argument is that, because this guy says that child rape does permanent damage, you can tell that his parenting probably hurts his daughter more than being repeatedly raped did?

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#89

Post by ikeboy »

ThomPete wrote: post #63
allendoerfer wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>You will get quite a different punishment for watching child porn than from raping a kid.

Source? The handful of cases I've heard of don't seem to match that claim.

Post reply on HN