On Jun 18, 2009, at 8:00 AM, Timo Schoeler wrote:
IMHO it's not the problem of 'how TOR works' or the (unquestionable)
benefits it provides, it's more the problem of the 'image' of the ISP
that hosts (customer's) exit nodes and therefore might have problems
with the local law (copyright infringements, etc).
The first step really is understanding how Tor works (for example, that
there is a difference between exit and non-exit nodes).
Sure. But -- from the ISP's lawyers POV -- where's the difference
between providing _encrypted_ and maybe _anonymized_ access to
$FORBIDDEN_CONTENT and _unencryped_, _not annonymized_ access? There
just is no difference. You're _possibly_ (sic!) breaking the law, and
this is sufficient to shut down your machine.
This is some kind of 'minority report' becoming reality.
But "how Tor
works" doesn't stop at explaining the technical aspects, it's also about
the community, the people who depend on it, and the role of the ISP.
Especially the censorship^Wchild porn filtering discussion in Germany
forces this topic being discussed, as claiming an exit node having
provided access to forbidden content is the 'A-bomb of getting a host
down' -- even if it didn't something forbidden.
Being a part of that decision and clearly showing where you stand is
better than passively watching.
That's more than true; however, I just wanted to show (and thusly,
prepare for action in consequence) that (especially) German ISPs will be
much more rigid from now on.