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

Jimmy Hess mysidia at gmail.com
Wed Dec 5 08:38:49 UTC 2012


On 12/5/12, Jutta Zalud <ju at netzwerklabor.at> wrote:
> Technically you are right. But then: what is the difference to ISPs?
> They offer routing- and DNS- and mail- and other services on
> various infrastructure.

ISPs typically have a customer.    They know their customer, they
retain  sufficient information to identify  their customer,  such as
name, billing address, physical location,  telephone number,  and have
a signed agreement to provide the service.
They collect consideration from their customer; usually in the form of cash.

The customer of an ISP is normally expected to adhere to some sort of
AUP or TOU,  providing terms of their use of the service.   Typically
including some provisions,  such as  'customer is responsible for
activities that are performed while dialed into their account', 'no
illegal activities',   '  no sending spam',  conducting other network
abuses.

For consumer ISPs,  sometimes activities such as running internet
servers, reselling,  or  providing ISP access to 3rd parties,  might
be restricted
(restrictions incompatible with running a TOR exit node on that service).


An end user operating a TOR exit node, or  wide open Wireless AP,
intentionally allows other people to connect  to their infrastructure
and the internet  whom  they have no relationship with or prior
dealings with, in spite of the possibility of network abuse or illegal
activities,    they choose to allow connectivity  without  first
gathering  information  required to hold the 3rd party responsible for
their activity.

An intentional "anonymizer" which is in contrast to what an ISP does.
The operator of an ordinary anonymizer service is subject to the
possibility of court-ordered intercept  upon future use.

If the operator of the Tor node believes that criminal intent is the
most likely use of the TOR exit node.    the degree of intentional
ignorance might be considered so severe,   that it becomes a situation
in which they are considered culpable.

E.g.  the Tor exit node operator might possibly be considered an
accessory, to the activity occuring on their node,  that they are
harboring / allowing to occur anonymously.


Not to say  whether Tor node operators are possibly guilty of anything or not.
But they are definitely different from ISPs  in  a number of important ways.

Any similarity between Open AP/Tor Exit node operator and ISP   are
highly superficial.

> jutta
--
-JH



More information about the NANOG mailing list