Judge Who Authorized Police Search of Privacy Activists Wasn't Told About Tor
Obviously running a TOR node will attract interest. It can be debated whether acting as a TOR router/carrier should impose on the operator at least some requirements to divulge connection logs to the authorities -- not that TOR would actually produce any meaningful logs in the first place. That's roughly what physical ISPs need to do if one of their IP addresses is associated with child porn. There's also the argument that if TOR nodes were given a guaranteed free pass when it comes to illegal content then why wouldn't people just run a TOR node and an open wifi on their home network just to cover their ass should they intend to use a torrent of shady network services.<p>However, the question that pops into my mind is that given how easy the trigger finger on child porn actually is in the current climate, then why are the producers and consumers of child porn still on the regular internet and not in the TOR darknet? If consumers are already willing to use TOR to access these sites there's no barrier to switch at all. The producers could even offer a legit site with no illegal content hosted there but which just redirects the browser to the (current) TOR address. I suppose there's a market for consumers who aren't using TOR but I would suspect that segment to be continuously shrinkin in the form of being prosecuted.