Blocking child pornography exits

[Ron Wireman]

From: Ron Wireman <ronwireman at gmail.com>
Date: 21-Jul-2007 04:48
Subject: Re: Blocking child pornography exits
To: Scott Bennett <bennett at cs.niu.edu>

On 21/07/07, Scott Bennett <bennett at cs.niu.edu> wrote:
>
>      On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 03:26:22 -0400 "Ron Wireman" <
> ronwireman at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I'm not sure what you mean.  While it is not the intent of the EFF,
>
>      Well, because you top-posted, rather than inserting your comments
> into the message to which you responded, it's not clear to me which part
> of that message you didn't understand.
>
> >tor is frequently used for all sorts of nefarious and perverted
> >purposes relating to child pornography.  The EFF takes measures to
>
>      I'm curious to know how you have determined that to be the case.


 It seems rather self evident to me.

>block spam, which is less of a problem than child abuse, so it should
>
>      Please give an example of how either EFF as an organization or the
> tor software project blocks either spam, a form of pollution of USENET
> newsgroups, or massmail, which is what you most likely meant.


By default, tor blocks exits to port 25.

AFAIK,
> neither EFF as an organization nor its tor project do anything of the
> sort.  The closest thing I can think of that the tor project does is to
> redistribute someone else's package (i.e., privoxy) as part of a self-
> installing software bundle that includes tor, privoxy, and TorButton
> for MS Windows systems.  But that's just a courtesy convenience for
> Windows users, the vast majority of whom are not particularly savvy
> about installing or maintaining networking software packages.  privoxy
> is not produced by the tor project.
>
> >also take measures to block child pornography.
>
>      Again, you're are suggesting that an anonymizing software project
> take
> on a several-hundred-million-dollar-per-year morality (or law, depending
> upon
> what country you live in) enforcement project.


It's not about morality; it's about protecting children.  I didn't ask
anyone to create any sort of anonymizing network, but since the tor group
did, it's incumbent upon them to make sure it's used properly and that
includes insuring it isn't used to harm children in the U.S. or elsewhere.
Otherwise, all they've done is unleash a paedophilic monster in a Chuck E.
Cheese restoraunt.

     Look.  You have the tool to set your own exit policy in the ExitPolicy
> statement(s) in the torrc file.  If you think that's too much work, then
> don't
> run an exit server.  Your exit policy is your responsibility.  Don't
> expect
> others to figure out what sort of policy you want and then to expend
> enormous
> amounts of resources to implement it for you.
> >
> >On 7/21/07, Scott Bennett <bennett at cs.niu.edu > wrote:
> >>      On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 03:03:40 -0400 "Ron Wireman" <
> ronwireman at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Why doesn't the EFF implement an option like 'no_exit_cp="YES"' for
> >> >server configurations that would allow people to block child
> >> >pornography?  I wish to run a tor exit node but, having been molested
> >>
> >>      Surely you jest!  It is not a function of the tor project to
> >> periodically
> >> search and evaluate the entire worldwide web to maintain a data base of
> >> sites
> >> that do not meet your requirements.  If there are sites for which you
> wish
> >> to
> >> deny exit service, then you are welcome to put them into your
> ExitPolicy
> >> statements in your torrc file yourself.  That's why the ExitPolicy
> statement
> >> exists, i.e., so that you can establish your own exit policy.
> >>
> >> >as a child, will not do so until such a feature exists.
> >>
> >>      Laziness?
> >> >
> >> >Thanks.
> >> >
> >>      No hay de que. :-)
> >>
>      And, seriously, please don't top-post.  It makes the thread difficult
> to follow.
>
>
>                                   Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
> **********************************************************************
> * Internet:       bennett at cs.niu.edu                              *
> *--------------------------------------------------------------------*
> * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good  *
> * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
> * -- a standing army."                                               *
> *    -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790         *
> **********************************************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/attachments/20070721/ac9c3a53/attachment.htm>