William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please help if you can.

Jima nanog at jima.tk
Mon Dec 3 06:07:37 UTC 2012

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 something which isn't illegal  in my own domain to facilitate
>> something that is quite illegal elsewhere, the fact of the matter is if
>> you run a service like this you don't get to pick and choose.
> In your opinion, would it make *any* kind of semse to engage in child
> pron AND run an exit node?

  It makes a little.  Last I checked (granted: years ago), a user can 
steer their traffic to a given exit node; by doing so, they could pick 
one that they know to have no internal scrutiny (i.e., by the person 
managing the exit node), while maintaining plausible deniability as to 
whether the traffic originating from that exit node was theirs, in the 
event of external scrutiny (as was the case here).

  I suspect running a middle node (not an exit, not an entrance) would 
provide a similar or greater degree of plausible deniability, albeit 
without the assurance of no internal scrutiny of the exit node.


More information about the NANOG mailing list