[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: Some legal trouble with TOR in France +
"Ringo Kamens" <2600denver@xxxxxxxxx> wrote,
>"I want to add my two cents about child porn. Censorship is censorship, it >doesn't matter what you censor or by what logic you censor. Banning child >porn is censorship, copyright is censorship, and stopping people from >speaking who have opposing political views is censrorship. It seems to be >a well known fact that freenet is filled with pedophilia, yet freenet is just >fine and dandy. If pedophilia was a real threat to privacy services, then >proxies wouldn't exist."
I can understand your concern with my suggestion from a "censorship" viewpoint, but we have to be PRACTICAL, if not moral.
The failure of other systems (networks etc) to be practical about child porn is one of the main reasons we have so much spying on us today.
And we, the public, are picking up the bill for this spying (taxes) and we are paying in many other ways as well.
We are paying with "fear" (if you run a Tor EXIT) of arrest and prosecution, for many more mere accusation, just for even running a Tor server or a Tor client is enough to keep many away from the Tor network. Just take a look at the mail for our French EXIT server raided last week.
I believe we should take a lead, and offer the EXIT servers protection from some mis-use of this variety and the users protection from possible "walking into" or being "tricked into" UNKNOWINGLY downloading a web page wtih this subject matter on it.
This is WHY I suggested the use of EXIT node filter lists, whatever the EXIt node wants, and with clients getting the option to specify the EXIt node also protects them by using specified list(s) at minimum to protect them.
Also my suggestions protect from general censorship. In this way, we rid ourselves of the thin end of the wedge. We declare this is being done to protect ourselves and children, and that this is ALL the censorship we are willing to allow.
I do understand the difficulties we will be getting ourselves into. But it is cheaper for us ALL if the police get to give us a set of block lists for child porn than them chasing us all, all over the network. Ok so they will come back with more than just child porn... thats when we have to draw the line! Our EXIt servers just refuse to allow them to be used.
I assume that the reason its not done already is the same one specified by the open networks, cnesorship... but they said it was coz the system couldnt do it (a lie). Now the open networks having to log and provide hidden trace facilitities (Lawful intercept) inside even the operating systems.
Wouldnt it have been better in the first place to have censored out the child porn, then hold the fort? Then the incentive (as publically expressed by politicians) to attempt to intercept eveything would be VERY much reduced.
Do we have any networks that have agreed to this anywhere that we can see as an exmple of what happens if you censor child porn out of your network? If so, it might help our discussions.
Thats my lot on this..
Message sent with Supanet E-mail
Signup to supanet at https://signup.supanet.com/cgi-bin/signup?_origin=sigwebmail