<html><head></head><body><div><span style="font-family: monospace;">Is the distinction between knowledge after the fact and knowledge at the time of occurence of "bad traffic" not important?</span></div><div><span style="font-family: monospace;"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family: monospace;">I'm all for reducing bad traffic, but where does the line get drawn?</span></div><div><span style="font-family: monospace;"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family: monospace;">I've also been dealing with multiple abuse reports on Digital Ocean. Quite a few common abuse ports are already disallowed (in fact I have only a small white list); most of the problems originate from port 80. And of course there's nothing we can do for encrypted web traffic anyway.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: monospace;"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family: monospace;">For what it's worth, I'm glad this thread came up and I've notified Digital Ocean of it in one of my support tickets.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: monospace;"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family: monospace;">It's really not up to lowly little me to decide whos traffic gets to pass.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: monospace;"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family: monospace;">Alecks Gates</span></div><div><br></div><div>On Tue, 2016-10-04 at 23:55 +0200, oconor@email.cz wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div>If I understand that well ... if tor operator is avare, that his tor node is used for illegal activity (when their ISP told them about that) and he's not going to do anything abou that, he wont be guity by complicity?</div><br><br><blockquote>On 04.10.16 22:37, oconor@email.cz wrote:<br><br>> Tor and IPS has both it's own nature and you shouldn't be punished, if<br>> your intension was just to filter the bad traffic.<br><br>And who is to decide what constitutes "bad traffic"? I am not a lawyer,<br>but in Germany one of the cornerstones of not being held responsible<br>for traffic passing through a Tor node is ยง 8 of the Telemediengesetz:<br>http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/tmg/__8.html -- sometimes referred to<br>colloquially as the "provider privilege".<br><br>One only is free of responsibility if one neither initiates a transfer,<br>nor selects the transfer's destination, nor selects or modifies the<br>transmitted data. That's what "passing through" means.<br><br>According to two lawyers I spoke to, exit policies might already be<br>borderline breaking these rules for exit nodes, but the technical basis<br>at least guarantees that traffic will never reach an exit node that does<br>not let it pass. Now think of a firewall that interferes with transfers<br>once the data has already reached the exit node. Wouldn't you agree that<br>this means selecting/modifiying the transmitted data?<br><br>That's just one national law that I am aware of, I imagine other<br>countries have similar regulations in place. Any internet service<br>provider interfering with net neutrality risks lawsuits, because it is<br>not an ISP's prerogative to decide what traffic is "good" or "bad".<br><br>-Ralph<br>_______________________________________________<br>tor-relays mailing list<br>tor-relays@lists.torproject.org<br>https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</blockquote><pre>_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
<a href="mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org">tor-relays@lists.torproject.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays">https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</a>
</pre></blockquote></body></html>