The problem, as I have explained elsewhere, is that if we attempt to censor the network based on content we will have to exclude ALL illegal or controversial content.
On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 03:10:55PM -0400, Edward J. Huff wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-08-07 at 08:51, Toad wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 11:25:46PM -0400, Edward J. Huff wrote:
> > > Kiddie porn is a minor issue compared to the copyright problem.
> > > For that, I think there will be a technological solution which
> > > will make it less easy to find on Freenet, so that no one without an ax
> > > to grind will think node operators are liable. Regarding the copyright
> > > problem, come and get us. We aren't going to give up without a fight.
> >
> > Uh, like what?
>
> I think everyone agrees it's not hard to convert a base 64 CHK key to
> the hex representation used in filenames, and to delete matching files
> from the datastore. (I don't see why SSK's would be any more difficult
> but I haven't actually looked at the details there).
>
> It is not hard to find out the "well known" kiddie porn CHK's. Monitor
> the KP Frost boards; also pick out KP from the descriptions in TFE.
>
> In order to avoid decrypting actual KP, use freenet.client.cli.Main
> with --noredirect and with the output redirected to /dev/null. The
> metadata comes out on stderr, and includes the CHK's of any splitfile
> blocks.
>
> So, without any help from developers, users could set up scripts which
> delete all "well known" KP CHK's from their datastores. Also, given
> patches and scripts, they could compile a version of fred (or distrubute
> a jar which goes ahead of freenet.jar on classpath) which gives
> immediate RNF to such keys.
>
> If they do that, I think no jury would find such a node operator
> criminally liable for carrying KP which he could not find out about
> without devoting large amounts of time looking for the keys. Hopefully,
> no prosecutor would go after such node operators, since being dragged
> into court is a considerable inconvenience even if the verdict is
> innocent. (The police rarely offer apologies, let alone compensation).
>
> On the other hand, investigators running freenet nodes themselves can
> easily find nodes which fail to censor well known KP CHK's. There is no
> need to "break" freenet to be able to do this.
>
> If the investigators are decent people, they will give such node
> operators a chance to voluntarily censor the KP, and even provide a list
> of CHK's which should be censored. The investigators themselves are
> able to look at the actual content and decide if it is KP without risk
> of illegal possession of decrypted KP.
>
> ---- file keyBlacklist/KeyBlacklist.java ----
> package keyBlacklist;
>
> import freenet.client.Base64;
> import freenet.support.HexUtil;
>
> public class KeyBlacklist
> {
> public static void main(String[] args)
> throws freenet.client.IllegalBase64Exception
> {
> int i;
> for (i = 0; i < args.length; i++) {
> if (args[i].startsWith("CHK@")) {
> byte[] key = Base64.decode(args[i].substring(4));
> System.out.println(HexUtil.bytesToHex(key));
> } else {
> byte[] key = HexUtil.hexToBytes(args[i]);
> System.out.println(Base64.encode(key));
> }
> }
> }
> }
> ---- compile and run script ----
> /usr/java/j2sdk1.4.2_05/bin/javac -classpath \
> freenet.jar keyBlacklist/KeyBlacklist.java
> /usr/java/j2sdk1.4.2_05/bin/jar cvf keyBlacklist.jar \
> keyBlacklist/KeyBlacklist.class
> /usr/java/j2sdk1.4.2_05/bin/java -classpath \
> freenet.jar:keyBlacklist.jar \
> keyBlacklist.KeyBlacklist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
