[tor-relays] new relays

[tor at t-3.net]

I feel like you are SO missing the point.

Making Tor block morally horrible things does not involve telling exit 
notes to block traffic to known porn sites.

The porn sites with the boobies that someone might hit on port 80 on 
the public internet represent the Catholic Church of porn, 
metaphorically-speaking. The truly terrible stuff is hidden to where 
you as an exit node operator would never be able to simply block it by 
IP address or domain name.

It seems clear that it would require designing into Tor the ability to 
inspect the content of its packets in the unencrypted form, plus be 
able to be configured to identify and reject files with certain 
identifiable signatures. This capability would have to be implemented 
in all nodes, in order to detect the reject-files should they come 
from the .onion sites.

That kind of capability would damage Tor's anonymity at the technical 
level (</understate>).

If someone believes that making a G-rated Tor is a good idea, they 
must not be considering the wisdom behind why it was designed the way 
it was, with each node not knowing the nature of the data it passes. 
The same technical characteristics which protect the investigators and 
whistleblowers and "rights of humanity" will also by their nature 
protect the boobie-watchers. Think about this, understand this.

It is not about the concept of anonymity and privacy, it's about the 
technical requirements necessary to provide it in the face of the 
hostile environment we have now.






On Sunday 01/09/2013 at 5:48 pm, Jon Gardner  wrote:
>
> On Aug 28, 2013, at 5:09 PM, Roger Dingledine <arma at mit.edu> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:12:01PM +0200, Tor Exit wrote:
>>>
>>> Why is it so bad if a Tor exit operator tries to match the use of
>>> their node with their own moral beliefs?
>>
>> I really would like to support this if I could.
>
> I appreciate your kind and well-reasoned response, Roger.
>
> For those others who, through (unkind, often poorly spelled, and 
> logically flawed) mockery and name-calling, hypocritically demanded 
> censorship of the very idea that individual liberty necessarily 
> involves individual moral responsibility, I have composed a poem.
>
> A few puerile punks would use Tor
> To browse for big boobs, nothing more
> "Rights of humanity"
> Was just false piety
> So bit by bit all the web closed the door.
>
> If you want to use Tor for immoral things, go ahead--it will obviously 
> accommodate you--but please stop pretending to speak for those of us 
> who run Tor nodes because we actually care about human rights and 
> liberty, and aren't just using those nice catch-phrases as a cover for 
> licentiousness and mindless self-gratification. You're a large part of 
> the reason that Tor is "technology non grata" in so many places, to so 
> many people that would otherwise fully support its mission.
>
> Hugs,
> Jon
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20130902/10468e8c/attachment.html>