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

151–160 of 185 posts

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#151

Post by geek_slop »

zxcvcxz wrote: post #23
bennettfeely wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> None of the websites contained any illegal content. Since I am not a legal authority (nor an expert in the law), I had to scale back the content. No illegal pictures nor files existed on any of the sites. In fact, each site contained exactly one image – a decorative background image to give the site a bit of flair (hidden service sites are notoriously lean). None of the honeypot sites explicitly offered to provide…

If he wasn't explicitly offering child porn then how can he assume people who visited his honey pot were looking for child porn if they didn't explicitly state it? Sure the guy offering pictures seems like a pedophile, but what about the others?

More than one offered pictures and in fact, according to other sources, seems to be a frequent method for pedos to prove to the hidden service operator that they are indeed "legit".

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#152

Post by edison_carter »

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 might be surprised. I'd say that child pornography is often punished more harshly than child rape.

The justice system weights the crime of consuming child pornography by the number of images the defendent is in "possession" of. I guess laws vary, but at least in my jurisdiciton, you can be sentenced to years in prison per image. It would be easy for a single wank session to result in -- potentially -- life in prison.

The issue is confounded by widespread lack of techical acumen among judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and even the forensic "experts" who investigate and testify (on both sides). For example, would you consider it reasonable to charge someone with a separate crime for every copy of the exact same digial file present on a hard disk? For both an image file and an automatically-generated thumbnail image of that same file? Do you meaningfully posess a file in your browsers temporary cache? How about a file deleted from the filesystem, but still present in residual form on the disk? Some of the issues are nuanced, and it's difficult to even have an intelligent conversation about the evidence.

[source: computer nerd supporting attorneys]

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#153

Post by majc2 »

jules wrote: post #130
majc2 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having done a small amount of volunteer work with children, I've had some exposure to child protection issues. Often, its a spiral downwards (IIRC its typically called the spiral of abuse), where the person in question erodes mental barriers so that they see the behaviour as normal. I don't accept the "just watching" argument - it is child abuse. What you must understand is that it normalises the behaviour in that pe…

Is there any actual evidence for this? By the same token you could say that watching Game of Thrones will make you a murderer. I could easily see it being the opposite: relieving sexual pressure could make people less likely to actually harm a child.

As I understand it yes, that the theory is suggested by academics with appropriate experience. See: http://mentorforensics.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Dr-Joe... for more info.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#154

Post by geek_slop »

Sideloader wrote: post #112
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 agree. Pedophilia is a sexual preference for pre-pubescent children, not an act. The vast majority of pedophiles are likely sad and lonely people condemned by a freak of nature to live with the burden of a sexual preference that in Western society carries the ultimate stigma. Even discussing pedophilia calmly and reasonably opens one to the charge of being a pedophile or a "pedophile apologist." Taboos can reveal a…

You guys crack me up. It was a facetious parenthetical comment that seems to have become the focal point. I run Tor, operate a legit hidden service, run an anonymous proxy on several of my machines, and use encryption all over the place. In no way whatsoever do I think Tor should be shut down. It has a purpose - but is being abused by criminals which is disappointing and potential detrimental to those that use if for a legitimate purpose.

As for LE, I mentioned in the article that I contacted them, as a courtesy, twice during the project. The last time was a few days before the hidden services were shut down. I let them know that I had a pedo honeypot running and was about to take it offline, giving them the opportunity to take over the VM or scrape the data gathered.

As for personal demons - we all have them and I won't argue that I may have more than most - it's all a part of life experiences. I've dealt with LE and CPS on child abuse issues for years and it has certainly tainted my view. Then again, I have a vantage point that most do not have - a much closer, clear view of the problem.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#155

Post by geek_slop »

facepalm wrote: post #129
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…

Just as heterosexuals don't rape people all the time, most pedophiles probably don't either. I think an estimated 2% of the population are pedophiles. I feel sorry for them. However, if they prove to be a danger to the kids, they have to be locked away or something. It's just because we don't know a better way to treat the issue.

Ah, but I believe that they do often act on their impulses. Mayo reported that more than 3/4 of persons who were arrested for child pornography were found to have molested a child. A federal prison study actually estimated even more.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#156

Post by geek_slop »

turkeysandwich wrote: post #150
PhasmaFelis wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

His parenting isn't worse than her abuse, obviously. But he should still chill the fuck out. Yes, bad things happen. But no, you're not permanently broken. You can grow up and have a normal life.

Disagree - in many cases they are permanently impacted, even if they are not aware of it. Who were are is a product of our life experiences and a child, especially one that is molested repeatedly during extend periods of their youth, are permanently changed. They form an especially deep distrust of adults and may lose the ability to utilize all the subtle clues we all incorporate when forming an opinion of a person.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#157

Post by mrsteveman1 »

AlyssaRowan wrote: post #95

Firstly, so - the writer is geek_slop? - let me get this straight about you?: · You adopted a girl at some point. · You are not law enforcement, and are not authorised by them in any way. · You disclose, here in this webpage, that you ran a hidden service site, via Tor, explicitly for paedophiles. · You have admitted the above, to the FBI. · You haven't considered what child protective services' post-adoptive service…

Excellent points. Regardless of the intent here, geek_slop may have only succeeded in getting the FBI and others to start an actual investigation of geek_slop.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#158

Post by api »

anonymoushn wrote: post #100
api wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Haha, photographs of consensual sex between high school seniors is rape porn I guess. Good thing high schoolers never have sex, since it would be rape.

I don't think that's what I was talking about.

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#159

Post by nightpool »

vacri wrote: post #42
nightpool wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this is clearly by someone who doesn't really understand how Tor works. Revealing exit node IP addresses is completely useless—this is a fundamental tenant of Tor's security. In fact, I believe that at any given time you can easily query the network for a list of all Tor exit nodes. I think the "why I now think Tor is the devil" question is answered in the opening—because it has illegal/immoral stuff on it. I'm…

> this is a fundamental tenant might be a typo, but just in case - a 'tenet' is a rule or principle, a 'tenant' is an occupier.

huh, I guess I just always assumed they were homonyms. Thanks!

Re: Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

#160

Post by Lawtonfogle »

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 if a prosecutor wasn't going to bring a case (and I've seen other just as stupid situations involving prosecutors going full force that I am not convinced they wouldn't), it still ends up having a chilling effect.
Post reply on HN