[tor-relays] Interrogated by Finnish police for alleged idendity crimes, fraud and attempts of fraud

Tue Nov 1 12:25:36 UTC 2016

Hi Volker,

A French text of law also exists for the following protection (following 
lines) but there is some others laws that are making it not completely 
clear, unfortunately.

You're not responsible about information that have been transmitted 
trough your Internet access if :
  -You're not originating the transmission
  -You're not selecting the recipient of the transmission
  -You're not selecting and not modifying the transmitted information

It's a little bit known because of intellectual property law 
infringement ("HADOPI" here).
Some years ago, when downloading movies and music with Peer to peer, if 
there were questions and complaint people simply could say "it's not me, 
somebody is likely using my IP trough WiFi".

So they written a law saying that you become responsible of "the faulty 
protection of your access", responsible of having neglected it, with a 
possible sanction about it. That means that today, you're supposed to 
have logs and identifications about "who is doing what" if you operate a 
public Internet access, and one time it's a reproach that I had orally 
about Tor. I didn't done a lot of research on this subject in order to 
know if Tor's case is fine about this law or not, since it was not a 
written and formal comment.

Here's for the technical points.

With hindsight :

Of course the law have been made in order to apply on movies and music 
download, and as a lot of laws, it can also be useful for information 
services in case of misdeed; and lot of people are agreeing with it, 
after all.
Finally it also have a repercussion about things like Tor; and I believe 
that not a lot of people here know about Tor.

People aren't always realizing that this kind of laws (supposed to be 
done "for people and on behalf of people"), are written out of any 
control from people, and are almost irreversible. And people never know 
how much things those law can touch. Few month ago with the "Emergency 
state" law about Islamic terrorism, ecology activists and volunteers had 
"assigned residence orders" during COP21, because this law is talking 
about security and trouble avoidance. Then, one can always say that it's 
good, but obviously I think nobody realize what we are loosing because 
of this kind of security laws. Even if climbing and eating flowers with 
big signs remains, most of the time, ineffective (as change.org and 
avaaz is most of the time), since elected persons who write the laws 
don't even care about it (and that's the biggest problem we have today). 
In our case, elected people are doing the law. For better laws, the only 
solution is better elected people, and that's a big problem too ;)

But then it's not related anymore to what we are discussing here (or 
just as it's about laws and fairness).

On 01/11/2016 10:22, Volker Mink wrote:
> When reading this i am glad i live in germany.
> We still have some laws which protect operators of TOR-Exits :)
>
> https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/tmg/__5.html
> https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/tmg/__8.html
> https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/tmg/__15.html
> (perhaps try to translate them with google)
>
> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 01. November 2016 um 01:03 Uhr
> *Von:* I <beatthebastards at inbox.com>
> *An:* tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
> *Betreff:* Re: [tor-relays] Interrogated by Finnish police for alleged 
> idendity crimes, fraud and attempts of fraud
> An excellent approach
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: julien.robin28 at free.fr
> > Sent: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 23:16:53 +0100
> > To: tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
> > Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Interrogated by Finnish police for alleged
> > idendity crimes, fraud and attempts of fraud
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > With the 3 big exit nodes I had in France (about 30MB/s in both
> > direction for each of them), I got called by police a lot of time (may
> > be 10 times approximately ? I do not really count anymore) on
> > investigations about misdeed that was committed from IP addresses of my
> > Tor relays (95.130.9.190 and 95.130.9.89 mainly, at Digicube, not
> > running anymore since June, 2015). No call about the Online.net one
> > (62.210.206.25, now Relay only since January, 2015), which was as big as
> > the 2 others and Exit too, but the ISP is well known as servers and
> > website big provider in France so I guess they realize it's an exit node
> > before calling me. The "facts" were also, most of the time, fraud and
> > attempts of fraud but also slander one time.
> >
> > I was most of the time called as suspect because IP are related to my
> > name (because I was leasing those servers), as for a home connection in
> > their point of view (not aware that those IP are dedicated servers IP).
> > Then I simply explain this in appropriate terms. After some times,
> > depending on the agent, for new investigations I'm sometimes "heard" as
> > witness. And most of the time the meeting is fine.
> >
> > Each time, I explain that my servers are rented in my name, and that I
> > use them for volunteer participation to a free proxies and VPN network
> > called Tor. I then give some details and explanations about what is Tor,
> > who created it, what are the goals of the project (about protection of
> > expression in bad countries and censorship avoidance, by accessing the
> > same Internet that others do, pricacy protection too), and yes, the
> > misuses... and that these are discouraging misuse and it is not the
> > reason why we participate in this network (far from it !). Then I give
> > the IP of those servers (and one of them is the reason why they called
> > me). And I explain that they are computers with a very fast bandwidth,
> > located in datacenters (Rennes, Vitry...) that can be accessed and
> > configured remotely, like a remote desktop.
> >
> > When they ask the question about logs and how to find the author of the
> > fact, my answer is that (unfortunately in that case), Tor is designed as
> > it's not possible for anybody to find who is the IP address from where
> > the traffic originated. It's very secure for those who need to use it.
> > Of course I tell them that if they have suspects in the entourage of the
> > victim, they can check if one of them was connected to the Tor network
> > at the time of the "fact" but as me and others people are using Tor for
> > online privacy without any intention of misuse against anybody, using
> > Tor is not a proof of misuse and is most of the time not done for bad
> > intention. Of course some questioning about a suspect using Tor at the
> > same hour would be rightful in this particular situation, anyway (like I
> > was questioned).
> >
> > All time I also come with a sheet of paper explaining Tor a little bit
> > deeply, what are the motivation of the teams and people behind this
> > project, (even in front of misuses that we are, of course, not proud of
> > having on the Tor network, even if without the Tor network, those
> > misuses would have been done by another way). In France I
> >
> > Of course sometimes the agent is not very happy about the Tor Network as
> > the investigations is likely to fail because of the Tor Network
> > efficiency. When the misuse is real and obviously bad, nobody can be
> > happy of it !
> >
> > In all those cases, my words are honest and true; as we shouldn't be
> > ashamed of participating to projects aiming to a better word and more
> > freedom, but shouldn't be happy of misuses, my personal preference is to
> > be understanding and true. I also tell them that I'm participating, with
> > my computers, to others scientific projects like World Community Grid
> > (explaining it's about cancer research and a lot of others subjects) :
> > It can be seen as "not related" but it is, as that's the way we are
> > volunteers to the Tor Network !
> >
> >
> > Here's for my feedback ! It's very personal of course, I hope nobody
> > would copy it without feeling it :) I'm just expressing my own feeling
> > on those situations, if it can help everybody to better understand those
> > cases.
> >
> > Best regards !
> >
> > Julien ROBIN
> >
> >
> > On 31/10/2016 14:25, Juuso Lapinlampi wrote:
> >> Putting the word out: I was interrogated by the Finnish police 
> today for
> >> multiple alleged counts (15+) of identity crimes, fraud and attempts of
> >> fraud. The invitation letter to be interrogated was sent out on
> >> 2016-10-21 and received by me on 2016-10-25. Today is 2016-10-31.
> >>
> >> The police suspects me because of an "IP-address assigned to my name",
> >> which I can't confirm or deny to have a relation to me. As a suspect, I
> >> was not told what this aclaimed IP-address was on a specific date to my
> >> knowledge. It is only speculation if these allegations wrongly against
> >> me have something to do with my relation with the Tor community or
> >> activism about digital rights online.
> >>
> >> Pending ongoing investigation, I am not allowed by law to share more
> >> specific details about to the investigation. I'd be glad to reveal more
> >> details about the case once the investigation is over and 
> share/hear how
> >> I became a suspect, once I know about it. (Note that my story is at
> >> least slightly opinionated.)
> >>
> >> I had a witness with me and I feel like my rights were being violated
> >> during the interrogation. The officer (not to be named publicly in
> >> respect for privacy) didn't want to allow me to write down their badge
> >> number by taking the badge away from me while trying to write down the
> >> numbers. The officer looked slightly anxious.
> >>
> >> After refusing to comment on few questions (to which I have a legal
> >> right as a suspect), soon after me and my belongings with me were
> >> searched for aclaimed "security reasons" and "making sure I'm not
> >> recording this interrogation (with a phone)". I'll let you decide 
> on the
> >> implications on unwarranted searches and individual legal protection.
> >> (See supreme court decision KKO:1990:36.)
> >>
> >> I audibly and multiple times in calm manner protested to not consent to
> >> searches, but alas it happened against my will without being suspected
> >> of wrongdoing at the police station in front of my witness. I didn't
> >> physically resist but also didn't voluntarily help the officer.
> >>
> >> The officer asked me inappropriate questions which were not related to
> >> the investigation. I was asked about my previous involvement with the
> >> police, how much I knew about the law and unsolicited advice about how
> >> "it will be easier for me if I talked". I demanded the officer to write
> >> down every question since the beginning of interrogation to the
> >> interrogation minutes, including the inappropriate ones, but the 
> officer
> >> refused, trying to make up a fake reason how they were "irrelevant".
> >>
> >> The officer raised their voice once or twice during the 45 minutes of
> >> interrogation, apparently angry that I would not "make a confession" or
> >> "help out and tell more" to prove innocence. Confronting the officer
> >> again with a simple question "am I a suspect or a witness" to 
> confirm my
> >> position, I was confirmed again that I was a suspect in the case. 
> Subtly
> >> reminding that "I have my rights" that should be respected, the officer
> >> replied among the lines of "I have my rights too" with disrespect.
> >>
> >> After the interrogation minutes did not rightfully represent what was
> >> actually questioned, the only sensible thing to me was to not sign the
> >> minutes. The officer after the officer made threatening claims 
> about how
> >> I "would be going to court" over this, but didn't spend too much effort
> >> on trying to get my signature.
> >>
> >> Once the interrogation was concluded, the officer made an unsolicited
> >> comment of "gladly not seeing people like [me] often". I told that I
> >> would be in contact with my lawyers.
> >>
> >> I am glad that I was not detained in a cell or arrested, which in my
> >> opinion I can likely attribute to having a witness with me. Looking 
> back
> >> at what just happened at the police station, I should have demanded a
> >> lawyer immediately to the interrogation after having my rights 
> violated,
> >> but I'm relying on my witness for now to make a testimony if necessary.
> >>
> >> I repeat that I absolutely deny being guilty of any suspected 
> crimes. Be
> >> safe out there, tor-relays@ and all. (I have legal support behind 
> me and
> >> have never been particularly worried about the investigation or outcome
> >> of this case.)
> >>
> >> Proof of invitation letter:
> >> 
> https://wubthecaptain.eu/files/legal/2016-10-21-alleged-fraud-identity-crime.jpg
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> tor-relays mailing list
> >> tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
> >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > tor-relays mailing list
> > tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
> > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161101/39352eba/attachment-0001.html>