Hacker builds tracking system to nab Tor pedophiles

Discussion in 'privacy technology' started by mirimir, Oct 21, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. nightrace

    nightrace Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Posts:
    159
    Anonymous didn't hack anything. The "leak" is pure FUD which consists of nothing more than publicly available information. They probably got that list of pseudonyms simply by registering on Lolita City. The real issue for pedos would be the DoS attack on Hidden Wiki and other .onion sites. If the attacks continue for more than a few weeks I imagine all the pedos will be moving to Freenet. Unlike Tor hidden services Freenet is both anonymous and uncensorable. Freenet is slower but with more users speed will improve. If there is enough interest someone may even create a non-Java version.
     
  2. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    There's no way I'd use Freenet simply because it uses Java. It's a security risk and a half for something that is supposed to be so secure. As for Lolita City, the pseudonyms won't do them any good unless they find some very amateur uploaders. There isn't much point on attacking Hidden Wiki either, as the .onion websites listed are already well known. Hell, I can Google Lolita City and get to it if I chose to, amongst others.
     
  3. nightrace

    nightrace Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Posts:
    159
    I am not aware of anyone's privacy having been compromised through Freenet. I am not saying it is impossible.

    Of course there is a point in attacking Hidden Wiki -- not everyone knows about it and no new links can be publicised. Hidden Wiki is constantly vandalised through editing and has lately become unavailable. This is why there are mirrors.

    http://7jguhsfwruviatqe.onion/index.php/Main_Page

    http://fkyvwpu7ccsorke2.onion/
     
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2011
  4. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    9,252
    I wonder how many of those mirrors are honeypots. Whose honeypots?
     
  5. nightrace

    nightrace Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Posts:
    159
    My guess is none. They are simply directories. Honeypots would normally ask you to enable Javascript or supply an email address.
     
  6. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    9,252
    I've encountered .onion sites with Javascript.
     
  7. nightrace

    nightrace Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Posts:
    159
    Yes, there are .onion sites with Javascript. These may or may not be honeypots.
     
  8. strongsword

    strongsword Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2011
    Posts:
    36
    Ok seriously, Tor should block all phedophilia related keywords on their own, who needs that ****?
     
  9. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,738
    Who really knows. When you block one thing, others will follow. The point of Tor is to bypass censorship, not create them.
     
  10. strongsword

    strongsword Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2011
    Posts:
    36
    I am talking about the Tor organization blocking child porn on their own, not some kind of add-on. And they already do that with P2P downloading anyways, why not do it for something more heinous.
     
  11. noone_particular

    noone_particular Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Posts:
    3,798
    You need to read up on how Tor works. Keyword filtering would only be possible if it was applied to every bridge and relay used to gain access to Tor. After that, all Tor traffic is encrypted. Tor relays often handle some very heavy traffic loads. Trying to filter it would be a very heavy load on the relays. Most Tor relay operators would refuse to add filtering. I know that I'd refuse. It's contrary to everything Tor is supposed to be. As soon as we make an exception for child porn, all of the "other reasons" will get added, like anti-terrorism, crime, etc. I don't have any use for child porn and even less for those who use that slop, but I'm tired of seeing this issue being blown way out of proportion and used as an excuse to censor people. If any form of censorship is ever added to Tor, I will stop using it and shut down the relay. Running it would no longer serve a purpose. This is like stopping carjacking by banning cars. You can't fix a problem by attacking the tools.
     
  12. box750

    box750 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    260
    Not really the right comparison, while P2P is a protocol that eats up bandwidth, child porn is content.

    Once tor had the ability to block certain content it is only a matter of time before courts jump on them with a subpoena asking them to block another kind of content (jihad, slander, etc), if you can block content and you refuse to abide by the court order you are guilty, if you have no such ability nobody can tell you anything about it.
     
  13. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    :thumb: Governments are chomping at the bit wanting to get their claws into services like these. You start filtering things, you open the door. It's also not Tor's responsibility, they don't control the content nor the ISPs and servers content is hosted on. The only thing that could be done is to shut down the Hidden Wiki, and, again, it would do no good as links like this are already well memorized, have mirrors and so on.

    You just aren't going to stop kiddie porn any more than you'll stop P2P by trying to filter it out or block it.
     
  14. jesusjesus

    jesusjesus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Posts:
    61
    Is p2p filtered or not?

    People that run p2p via tor are the lowest of the low. They could just as easily pay a very reasonable amount for a VPN, but instead are so cheap they misuse a free product not at all meant for p2p and the resulting slowness occurs. Nobody wants to be sued for $3000 for downoading a movie by some scum of the earth lawyer, I get that, but they shouldn't be using tor to circumvent copyright infringment

    [that is if p2p is possible on tor. some have said it's not]
     
  15. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    Yes, it's possible, just highly inadvisable. The reason is not the slowing of Tor, which of course happens, but P2P software generally doesn't have its bases covered when it comes to privacy. If the connection is not going through Tor, which is isn't when using, say, Bittorrent, you can't expect Tor to protect you. You leave yourself wide open if you use anything but your browser with Tor, unless you do a LOT of configuring.

    Tor is going to be slow regardless, due to how it works. P2P just makes it that much worse.
     
  16. noone_particular

    noone_particular Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Posts:
    3,798
    It's up to the operator of each exit node to decide what traffic they want to allow. In addition to specifying allowed ports, each relay can also specify bandwidth limits. If the exit node operator chooses to, they can kill any connection at any time.
    Tor exit policies.gif
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.