Came here and to post this too. It's really a shame how the current system of law enforcement is designed to destroy completely destroy people.
I'm idling in some of the same public IRC channels as will (since way before he was raided for running a TOR node) it was/is painful to watch how this completely destroyed him.
It has really put me off, and probably many others, from ever hosting a TOR node, which might what makes this even worse. If you want to help people in heavily censored (or monitored, but what would be every single one of them, as of now) countries you get punished and your life gets completely ruined.
Seriously, the guy was like 20 or so when the police raided his home because of a TOR relay. Financially and mentally ruining someone when he didn't even do anything wrong is just... It makes me really angry.
Maybe, and I realise this sounds borderline crazy, but hear me out.
Maybe we shouldn't be running TOR exit nodes personally. It seems to me a couple of people should form a nonprofit company to run the node and distance themselves from liability that way. You'll still need to shut it down if your company is found guilty of running a server that was used to distribute bad bits, but it would be more "we wanted to make something nice and these gosh darned paedophiles got in our way and we can't continue" and less "you collude with paedophiles and are a paedophile and a criminal". It will be harder and it will take more funds and perhaps it's borderline impossible, but this is where things seem to be going. Be a corporation, because individual people get squashed like bugs.
Unfortunately, setting up a limited liability corporation tend to require substantial funding up front, I believe several months worth of median income in many places.
I'm afraid your advice actually reduces to "be rich, because poor people get squashed like bugs". (Of course, another possibility is to rally many people to your cause. Then you can fund your expensive legal structure with poor people.)
Hmm, that varies from place to place, but yes - not cheap. Aren't there also different fees depending on whether it's for-profit or not?
Obviously you'd set it up with more people, there obviously are enough who want to contribute to Tor. You'd gather capital, sign some up as co-founders and use what you can to buy colocation and set up servers. I wonder if you could also switch things around and colocate in people's homes by renting the property and paying for a residential connection, then renting it back to whoever lived there originally at the original fee. Basically, you create a company, have it rent an apartment and pay for a connection, then you rent the apartment and connection from the company, which should end up with you (legally) having (nearly) nothing at all to do with the black box in the corner that connects to the internet.
Unfortunately this hasn't been the first case like that and it probably won't be the last one either. Saying they destroy peoples lives on purpose isn't fair though. Everybody setting up an exit node knows there's some chance the police will knock on your door one day or at the very least you'll end up getting a lot of letters. Projects like https://www.torservers.net exist for that very reason. I understand donating money isn't as fulfilling/fun/cool as hosting an exit node yourself but at this point everybody should be well aware of the possible consequences.
People are aware that they may draw law enforcement attention, but many believe the issue will be cleared up when they politely explain how Tor works and that it's not really their fault that someone did something naughty through their endpoint. Unfortunately, sometimes it's not that simple.
It should be underscored that unless you have access to unlimited good, free legal help, you probably have no business running an exit node, and you should have that good, free lawyer make sure that the laws in your jurisdiction are Tor-friendly, as some places have been passing laws that hold the IP's owner responsible for all activity, regardless of excuses ("open wifi" doesn't fly either).
The sad part is that this means Tor exit nodes will continue to be primarily the province of large organizations who are more likely to be in cahoots with ruling authorities, which weakens the strength of the network for everyone.
>> I don't get how the rest of your comment supports this statement.
It doesn't. I didn't make that statement - you did.
I said they don't destroy lives _on purpose_. Neither are they trying to stop people from running exit nodes. They don't know what an exit node is. Somebody is doing nasty things using Tor. They look at the Whois record. Your name pops up. They knock on your door. End of story (I don't like the story either).
@cookiecaper:
The last paragraph of your comment isn't true. The Tor Project itself trusts and supports these organizations (like torservers.net - I'm sure there are many others like it). All nodes under control of one organization are marked as such inside the network so Tor clients can avoid using more than one of them at a time.
By the way. What's with all the downvotes? You do realise that I'm not responsible for anybody's house getting raided by the police, yes? I'm tired of blaming the police while nobody is willing to sit down with them and explain to them how Tor works. It's just not helpful.
It sounds to me like the best way to keep yourself safe from having your every electronic gadget taken by police would be to set it up your TOR node under some limited liability company like structure so while it would be taken down you would at least still be able to function while you fight it.
> If you want to help people in heavily censored (or monitored, but what would be every single one of them, as of now) countries you get punished and your life gets completely ruined.
I know that's the dream of everyone running a Tor node but let's face it, you're mostly helping drug dealers and child pornographers operate. Not saying that's your intention, but that's what's happening. That's why it's absolutely crazy to operate a node. Find some other way to help if you value your freedom.
> You could argue the same about encryption, so should encryption be banned or deemed immoral now?
Sigh. This sounds just like the arguments about cars ("they can kill people, should we ban them too???"). Let's get real, the vast majority of Tor traffic is, shall we say, for nefarious purposes. Encryption has numerous applications which are perfectly legitimate and it could be argued that the legitimate applications outweigh the illegitimate ones. You might have a point if "encryption" meant "operating an open relay where anyone can encrypt anything for any purpose".
> You can still operate a TOR exit node safely by anonymously getting a server paid for with a cryptocurrency. It's perfectly safe.
Safe for whom? You as an individual, perhaps. Definitely not safe for the guy running the exit node.
> Let's get real, the vast majority of Tor traffic is, shall we say, for nefarious purposes.
I don't really understand your argument here. Are you saying that Tor should be banned because the ratio of illegitimate to legitimate applications is higher than that of encryption software? I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm just trying to understand what you're saying here.
> Safe for whom? You as an individual, perhaps. Definitely not safe for the guy running the exit node.
Well you would be the guy running an exit node on a VPS hosted by a hosting company/ISP (after all, they seem to be protected by law). Looks pretty bullet proof to me. Worst case scenario - they shut down your VPS.
> I don't really understand your argument here. Are you saying that Tor should be banned because the ratio of illegitimate to legitimate applications is higher than that of encryption software? I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm just trying to understand what you're saying here.
No, I'm not saying it should be banned, I just don't want to hear people whine about "OMG I want to help these poor oppressed people soooo much and the government just doesn't understand!!!" knowing full well that the reason the government comes down so hard on Tor is because it's primarily a vehicle for illegal activity (seriously illegal activity at that).
I'm just saying hey, the government doesn't like it and don't kid yourself about the reason -- and certainly don't run a Tor node if you aren't ready for potential consequences.
> Let's get real, the vast majority of Tor traffic is, shall we say, for nefarious purposes.
Citation needed. Plenty of people use Tor to avoid government censorship (think China), to keep their information free from government spying (think NSA), or simply to secure their connection to the Internet. One need not be up to no good to use Tor, and I think your assumption that most are up to no good is off-base.
Call me crazy, but I'm alright if some unsavory characters have an easier time staying anonymous if at the same time it makes it harder for states to censor the internet (they go hand in hand).
Tor lets people access things that their government doesn't want them to. Sometimes that means porn and drugs, but in much of the world that can simply be a news report.
I'm idling in some of the same public IRC channels as will (since way before he was raided for running a TOR node) it was/is painful to watch how this completely destroyed him.
It has really put me off, and probably many others, from ever hosting a TOR node, which might what makes this even worse. If you want to help people in heavily censored (or monitored, but what would be every single one of them, as of now) countries you get punished and your life gets completely ruined.
Seriously, the guy was like 20 or so when the police raided his home because of a TOR relay. Financially and mentally ruining someone when he didn't even do anything wrong is just... It makes me really angry.