In any event, I'm pretty sure that I'd rather get hit with tampering with
evidence versus them retrieving data that may incriminate me. I believe
this may be a the lesser of two evils game.
-Original Message-
From: Kyle Creyts [mailto:kyle.cre...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 17,
On 11/30/2012 02:02 PM, Naslund, Steve wrote:
OK, there must be a lot more paranoid people out there than I thought
for awhile? I am sure he will let you out to go to the bank, get your
stuff, and leave town. I think you have seen way to many movies.
So if the cops show up at his door
In most jurisdictions, wouldn't using a de-gaussing ring in the door frame
to wipe any equipment being removed constitute tampering with evidence or
interfering with an investigation if the authority in question is in
possession of a warrant/subpoena?
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Jeroen van
Drifting a big off topic for NANOG (but hey, that happens every /pi/
days anyways!), but I'll toss this in...
Like every other legal incident, it would be unique to your own
situation. Keep in mind that, should any of the charges you mentioned
go to court, the prosecution would have to prove
On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:28:28 -0500, Peter Kristolaitis said:
Now, having said all that... I'm not sure I'd want to pay the
electricity bill for keeping that degausser running... :p
An EMP device doesn't have to chew power all the time...
And of course, there's this:
In message 34925.1355780...@turing-police.cc.vt.edu, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
writes:
--==_Exmh_1355780734_2398P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:28:28 -0500, Peter Kristolaitis said:
Now, having said all that... I'm not sure I'd want to pay the
On 12/17/12, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
In message 34925.1355780...@turing-police.cc.vt.edu,
On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:28:28 -0500, Peter Kristolaitis said:
Yeah... degaussing rings consume a lot of energy you shouldn't need
to consume. If you _must_ be able to protect data from
On 12-12-17 21:45, Jimmy Hess wrote:
Yeah... degaussing rings consume a lot of energy you shouldn't need
to consume.
Now now, you clearly have not watched enough scient fiction/action
movies... Clearly, you have a mechanism which triggers the degaussing
(or neutron bomb in the basement the
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 20:45:04AM -0600, Jimmy Hess wrote:
If you _must_ be able to protect data from extreme
physical threats: keep it encrypted end to end at all times,
Physical threat is somewhat different than seizure by law enforcement, though.
Although mooted when authorities
On 12/18/12, Henry Yen he...@aegisinfosys.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 20:45:04AM -0600, Jimmy Hess wrote:
Physical threat is somewhat different than seizure by law enforcement,
though.
I'm not so sure about that. It's a kind of physical threat; the set
of all physical threats
On 3 December 2012 07:19, Joakim Aronius joa...@aronius.se wrote:
I am all for providing anonymized access to help free speech. Perhaps its
better with anon access to specific applications like twitter, fb etc and
not general internet access. I suspect that the 'free speech' part of the
On 11/29/12 23:18 , Joakim Aronius wrote:
I am all for being anonymous on the net but I seriously believe that
we still need to enforce the law when it comes to serious felonies
like child pr0n, organized crime etc, we can't give them a free pass
just by using Tor. I dont think it should be
Joel jaeggli wrote:
The internet is potentially quite a useful tool for getting your message
out so long as using it isn't holding a gun to your own head. While we
site here with the convenient idea of some legal arbitrage which allows
me to do something which isn't illegal in my own domain
On 2012-12-02 22:44, Michael Painter wrote:
Joel jaeggli wrote:
The internet is potentially quite a useful tool for getting your message
out so long as using it isn't holding a gun to your own head. While we
site here with the convenient idea of some legal arbitrage which allows
me to do
* Joel jaeggli (joe...@bogus.com) wrote:
On 11/29/12 23:18 , Joakim Aronius wrote:
I am all for being anonymous on the net but I seriously believe that
we still need to enforce the law when it comes to serious felonies
like child pr0n, organized crime etc, we can't give them a free pass
The BBC has an article about a similar issue on a Tor exit node in Austria:
Austrian police raid privacy network over child porn
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20554788
##
Austrian police have seized servers that were part of a global anonymous
browsing system, after images showing child
Example of an actual warrant:
https://www.eff.org/sites/default/files/filenode/inresearchBC/EXHIBIT-A.pdf
Please also keep in mind, if it's relevant, that *no warrant* is required for
data that is stored by a third-party. Data on a server, TOR or otherwise,
would by definition be data
The BBC has an article about a similar issue on a Tor exit node in Austria:
Austrian police raid privacy network over child porn
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20554788
actually it is not a similar case but the case of William W. that
BBC reported. Though with some mistakes: the servers
* Will Hargrave (w...@harg.net) wrote:
On 29 Nov 2012, at 20:53, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
The assertion being made here, that it's somehow illegal (or immoral,
or scary) for there to be not-completely-traceable internet access in
the US, is absurd.
The real
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 08:04:02AM -0500, Chris quoted (William):
Yes, it happened to me now as well - Yesterday i got raided for
someone sharing child pornography over one of my Tor exits.
Question: what evidence has been published -- that is, placed somewhere
that we can all see it -- that
On 2012-11-30 13:51 , Joakim Aronius wrote:
* Will Hargrave (w...@harg.net) wrote:
On 29 Nov 2012, at 20:53, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
wrote:
The assertion being made here, that it's somehow illegal (or
immoral, or scary) for there to be not-completely-traceable
internet
On November 29, 2012 at 11:50 george.herb...@gmail.com (George Herbert) wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Tom Beecher tbeec...@localnet.com wrote:
Assuming it's true, it was bound to happen. Running anything , TOR or
otherwise, that allows strangers to do whatever they want is just
On November 30, 2012 at 08:18 joa...@aronius.se (Joakim Aronius) wrote:
I am all for being anonymous on the net but I seriously believe that we
still need to enforce the law when it comes to serious felonies like child
pr0n, organized crime etc, we can't give them a free pass just by
Barry Shein wrote:
On November 30, 2012 at 08:18 joa...@aronius.se (Joakim Aronius) wrote:
I am all for being anonymous on the net but I seriously believe that we
still need to enforce the law when it comes to serious felonies like child pr0n,
organized crime etc, we can't give them a
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote:
Yeah, next they'll let just anyone walk down the sidewalk without
identifying themselves. And those are public sidewalks paid for by tax
dollars!
If you hang out with criminals, sooner or later you'll encounter a
situation
On Nov 30, 2012, at 4:58 AM, Rich Kulawiec r...@gsp.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 08:04:02AM -0500, Chris quoted (William):
Yes, it happened to me now as well - Yesterday i got raided for
someone sharing child pornography over one of my Tor exits.
Question: what evidence has been
-Original Message-
From: Rich Kulawiec [mailto:r...@gsp.org]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 6:59 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please
help if you can.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 08:04:02AM -0500, Chris quoted (William):
Yes, it
On 11/29/12, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
If the computer at IP:port:timestamp transmitted child porn, a warrant
for all computers is also too broad. Computers which use said IP
As you know, there may always be some uncertainty about which computer
was using a certain IP address at a
On 11/30/2012 04:01 PM, Naslund, Steve wrote:
I am a little concerned that this guy keeps a safe deposit box with a burner
phone and cash around. Is he a CIA agent? :)
Anyone who DOESN'T have such things stashed away somewhere is, IMHO,
incredibly naive and taking on quite a large amount
As a network professional do I not have a duty to protect my companies
network from unauthorized access within my ability to do so? I think I
do. If you lost all of your credit card and identity data because I
left an open wifi hotspot on my network would you have a liability case?
I sure think
OK, there must be a lot more paranoid people out there than I thought
there were. I personally don't have a runaway kit stashed away. I
will get right on that. So when that mouth breather cop won't believe
you are innocent, your answer is to grab your stuff and go on the lamb
for awhile? I am
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
If they had a qualified technician, they probably wouldn't be raiding
a TOR exit node in the first place; they would have investigated the
matter more thoroughly, and saved precious time.
And what if the TOR exit node was
From: Jimmy Hess [mailto:mysi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 3:47 PM
To: William Herrin
Cc: NANOG list
Subject: Re: William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please
help if you can.
On 11/29/12, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
If the computer at IP:port:timestamp
-Original Message-
From: Peter Kristolaitis [mailto:alte...@alter3d.ca]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 4:53 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please help if
you can.
(Note: I don't mean to imply that all cops are power hungry
I didn't say anything about trying to run away. That probably won't
accomplish a whole lot in the long run. But when all of your bank
accounts and credit cards are frozen, and your house is a crime scene,
at least you have the means to rent a hotel room, contact
family/lawyers, etc.
And
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/12, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
If the computer at IP:port:timestamp transmitted child porn, a warrant
for all computers is also too broad. Computers which use said IP
As you know, there may always be some
Guess who has power over the networks and Internet. We do and power corrupts
us too. There are some bad guy ISPs and engineers out there too. Just because
you are running a Tor server to allow for privacy protection does not mean
you were never doing anything illegal through it. I know this
OK, I get it. I think my BS detector is set to high today. I am just
really suspicious that this guy that runs an large ISP can't at least
wait until there are charges before all the uproar. I think if the cops
came and seized my home PCs right now I would probably give them the
time to look at
I might be reading this the wrong way but it looked to me like the cops
raided his home and the Tor server is hosted off site with an ISP. That
is what is bugging me so much. The cops raided his house, not the
location of the server. If they had tracked the server by its IP it
would have led to
I can't help but wonder who would send money to same random person based on
a story that may or may not be true. Were these people sucked in by Nigeria
scams as well?
Not only that, but the list of people who proclaimed their innocence only
to be proven guilty is very long. I can't vouch for
Naslund, Steve wrote:
I might be reading this the wrong way but it looked to me like the cops
raided his home and the Tor server is hosted off site with an ISP. That
is what is bugging me so much. The cops raided his house, not the
location of the server. If they had tracked the server by its
PROCEDURE FOR SEIZURE OF COMPUTERS AND RELATED DEVICES
This search warrant covers and controls the procedure for searching: (1)
electronic or computer devices, related equipment or media which has been
authorized to be seized pursuant to this warrant on the basis that it is
contraband or a
Not a lawyer.
than stfu with the legal crap
Not only that, but the list of people who proclaimed their innocence only
to be proven guilty is very long. I can't vouch for countries outside of
the USA, but here at least we don't get subpoenas on a whim. They are
usually part of a very long drawn-out investigation, and they usually are
If you run Tor, then you should probably accept that it might be used
for activity that you don't approve of or even is in violation of the
law.
I'm not saying Tor is good or bad, just that if you're using it you
probably know what you're getting into.
In order to catch someone in a criminal
Back in the early days of the public internet we didn't require any id
to create an account, just that you found a way to pay us. We had
anonymous accts some of whom dropped by personally to pay their bill,
some said hello but I usually didn't know their names and that's how
they wanted it, I'd
On Nov 29, 2012, at 11:17 , Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote:
Back in the early days of the public internet we didn't require any id
to create an account, just that you found a way to pay us. We had
anonymous accts some of whom dropped by personally to pay their bill,
some said hello but
On November 29, 2012 at 11:45 patr...@ianai.net (Patrick W. Gilmore) wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 11:17 , Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote:
It's funny, it's all illusion like show business. It's not hard to set
up anonymous service, crap, just drop in at any wi-fi hotspot, many
On Nov 29, 2012, at 12:58 , Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote:
On November 29, 2012 at 11:45 patr...@ianai.net (Patrick W. Gilmore) wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 11:17 , Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote:
It's funny, it's all illusion like show business. It's not hard to set
up anonymous
Hi,
I gotta ask and I'm sure someone would if I didn't, but how do we know
this guy is legit?
He's jumped up on a forum saying, Hey, police raided me, help. gib
mone plz and failed to provide and reason as to how he's real and not
just making it up.
Maybe if there's a way to know this guy is
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote:
Do you think if the police found out child pr0n was
being served from a starbux they wouldn't
confiscate the equipment from that store?
I think if they took the cash registers too the Starbucks lawyer would
be in
It's difficult to compare a guy in Austria to a multi-billion dollar
corporation. Here in the US, the fed has charged 3 men with involuntary
manslaughter for their parts in the Gulf of Mexico Rig explosion. BP
received a slap on the wrist, and a decent (to us, not them) sized fine.
On 11/29/12
On Nov 29, 2012, at 13:57 , William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net
wrote:
Do you think if the police found out child pr0n was
being served from a starbux they wouldn't
confiscate the equipment from that store?
I think
How would this be legally different than receiving the illegal content
in an envelope and anonymously forwarding the envelope via the post
office? I am pretty sure you are still liable since you were the
sender. I realize that there are special postal regulations but I think
that agreeing to
Assuming it's true, it was bound to happen. Running anything , TOR or
otherwise, that allows strangers to do whatever they want is just folly.
People will spend time and money securing their home wireless so their
neighbor can't steal their internet, but willingly allow strangers from
I think the best analogy I would use in defense is something like the
pre-paid cellular phones that are sold. That is about the only
anonymous communications service I can think of off the top of my head.
Problem is that most people are not licensed carriers and may not be
able to hide behind
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 01:14:08AM +1100, Emily Ozols wrote:
Hi,
I gotta ask and I'm sure someone would if I didn't, but how do we know
this guy is legit?
He's jumped up on a forum saying, Hey, police raided me, help. gib
mone plz and failed to provide and reason as to how he's real and not
Not sure if there is a legal precedent for this, but logically the
difference is that there are no robots that I know of that can automatically
receive and parse postal mail, then re-address and forward it. For a human
to forward a letter takes a conscious manual action, even if they choose not
We had a guy (aka potential customer) inquire the other day about hosting a
Tor exit on our infrastructure the other day; he disappeared fairly
quickly when he figured out that we weren't just going to give him an
endless supply of unmetered 10G bandwidth. I was looking forward to
billing him.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 13:57 , William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net
wrote:
Do you think if the police found out child pr0n was
being served from a
- Original Message -
From: Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net
Mere conduit defense. (Please do not anyone mention common carrier
status or the like, ISPs are _not_ common carriers.)
Do you think if the police found out child pr0n was being served from
a starbux they wouldn't
- Original Message -
From: Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net
I think if they took the cash registers too the Starbucks lawyer would
be in court an hour later with a motion to quash in one hand and an
offer of full cooperation in the other.
And if the sky were orange
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Tom Beecher tbeec...@localnet.com wrote:
Assuming it's true, it was bound to happen. Running anything , TOR or
otherwise, that allows strangers to do whatever they want is just folly.
Such as, say, an Internet Service Provider business?
...
--
-george
Not really comparable.
Speaking from a US point of view, ISPs has strong legal protections
isolating them from culpability for the actions of their customers. I
know internationally things are different, but here in the US the ISP
doesn't get dinged, except in certain cases where they are
I think service providers are afforded special protections because the
law recognizes their utility and the inability of the service provider
to be responsible for the actions of all of their customers. The major
problem is that not every individual has the same protections. A lot of
ISPs are
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Tom Beecher tbeec...@localnet.com wrote:
Not really comparable.
Speaking from a US point of view, ISPs has strong legal protections
isolating them from culpability for the actions of their customers. I know
internationally things are different, but here in
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com wrote:
ISPs also do not allow strangers to do whatever they want ISPs have
responsibilities to act on DCMA notices and CALEA requests from law
enforcement. These are things that Tor exit nodes are not capable of
doing. If
Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. ยง230 is the US law that has been
interpreted to provide immunity to ISP for the actions of their users.
Zeran v. America Online, Inc., 4th Circuit, 1997
Jane Doe v. America Online, Inc., 5th Circuit, 1997
Blumenthal v. Drudge, DC District, 1998
Green v.
The entire point of Tor is to be untraceable back to the source. Egress
filters can prevent future abuse but do not provide for tracing back to
the original source of offending conduct. They are not trying to stop
the flow of the data in this case, they want the source in jail. If law
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com wrote:
The entire point of Tor is to be untraceable back to the source. Egress
filters can prevent future abuse but do not provide for tracing back to
the original source of offending conduct. They are not trying to stop
1. Running open access wireless does not make you legally an ISP and if
your open wireless is used to commit a crime you could be criminally
negligent if you did not take reasonable care in the eyes of the
court.
2. If I provide access to four or five friends, I am not an ISP and in
fact I am
The entire question here is whether CALEA's covered entities
definition and ISP common carrier (not exactly, but the commonly
used term for CDA protections available, see earlier discussion)
definitions overlap.
The answer is no. It always has been no. Plenty of publishers and
access providers
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 01:19:19PM -0600, Naslund, Steve wrote:
I think the best analogy I would use in defense is something like the
pre-paid cellular phones that are sold. That is about the only
anonymous communications service I can think of off the top of my head.
Problem is that most
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:26:57 -0500
From: Tom Beecher tbeec...@localnet.com
Subject: Re: William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please help if
you can.
Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. 230 is the US law that has been
interpreted to provide immunity to ISP for the actions
47 U.S.C. 230 doesn't do much for child porn, no. However, PROTECT does.
PROTECT spells out reporting, but also contains safe harbor provisions such
that an ISP who didn't know that child porn was being transmitted across their
network cannot be prosecuted for not knowing, only for not taking
On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, Naslund, Steve wrote:
1. Running open access wireless does not make you legally an ISP and if
OK.
your open wireless is used to commit a crime you could be criminally
negligent if you did not take reasonable care in the eyes of the
court.
I believe this is incorrect
Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:
2. If I provide access to four or five friends, I am not an ISP and in
fact I am responsible if they use my connection to do something illegal
since I am the customer of record. If you loan your car to an
unlicensed driver and he kills someone,
Naslund, Steve wrote:
1. Running open access wireless does not make you legally an ISP and if
your open wireless is used to commit a crime you could be criminally
negligent if you did not take reasonable care in the eyes of the
court.
Related:
You are correct about most people not falling under CALEA. That also
means that they do not have the safe harbor provisions provided to
facilities based providers (however an open wireless hotspot MIGHT just
make you a wireless facilities based provider). You are not under an
obligation to
On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, Naslund, Steve wrote:
[...]
When it comes to running an open access point, I think the legal issue
would be negligence. Is it negligence for the 90 year old grandma to
have an open AP (probably not, just didn't know better)? Is it
negligence for me to have an open AP
On 29 Nov 2012, at 20:53, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
The assertion being made here, that it's somehow illegal (or immoral,
or scary) for there to be not-completely-traceable internet access in
the US, is absurd.
The real issue here is *not* the legality of the act of
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Jim Mercer j...@reptiles.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 01:19:19PM -0600, Naslund, Steve wrote:
I think the best analogy I would use in defense is something like the
pre-paid cellular phones that are sold. That is about the only
anonymous communications
Yes, but if you are operating a TOR node, it's not entirely clear to me that
you are not actually an ISP (whether you
realize that or not).
You are, after all, providing a form of internet access to non-paying customers.
Owen
On Nov 29, 2012, at 11:58 , Tom Beecher tbeec...@localnet.com wrote:
* Patrick W. Gilmore (patr...@ianai.net) wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 12:58 , Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote:
It would seem like they'd have to confiscate the equipment at every
Starbucks in their jurisdiction, which could be every one in the US
for example.
They didn't confiscate
Joakim Aronius wrote:
Lets assume that some child pr0n dealer used this Tor exit node, is it not reasonable if the police wants to see if
there are
logs that make it possible to catch the sleazebag? Should LE ignore crime if it originates from a network which operates
a Tor
exit node?
I am
85 matches
Mail list logo
