timo.schoeler at riscworks.net
Thu Jun 18 06:19:03 UTC 2009
> Hi Timo,
> On Jun 18, 2009, at 8:00 AM, Timo Schoeler wrote:
>> IMHO it's not the problem of 'how TOR works' or the (unquestionable)
>> benefits it provides, it's more the problem of the 'image' of the ISP
>> that hosts (customer's) exit nodes and therefore might have problems
>> with the local law (copyright infringements, etc).
> The first step really is understanding how Tor works (for example, that
> there is a difference between exit and non-exit nodes).
Sure. But -- from the ISP's lawyers POV -- where's the difference
between providing _encrypted_ and maybe _anonymized_ access to
$FORBIDDEN_CONTENT and _unencryped_, _not annonymized_ access? There
just is no difference. You're _possibly_ (sic!) breaking the law, and
this is sufficient to shut down your machine.
This is some kind of 'minority report' becoming reality.
> But "how Tor
> works" doesn't stop at explaining the technical aspects, it's also about
> the community, the people who depend on it, and the role of the ISP.
>> Especially the censorship^Wchild porn filtering discussion in Germany
>> forces this topic being discussed, as claiming an exit node having
>> provided access to forbidden content is the 'A-bomb of getting a host
>> down' -- even if it didn't something forbidden.
> Being a part of that decision and clearly showing where you stand is
> better than passively watching.
That's more than true; however, I just wanted to show (and thusly,
prepare for action in consequence) that (especially) German ISPs will be
much more rigid from now on.
More information about the tor-talk