W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices: Issue 25 and 34

From: Aleecia M. McDonald <aleecia@aleecia.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 18:30:41 -0800
Message-Id: <345264D9-EE56-4FEB-84AA-B8AA98EA785E@aleecia.com>
To: "public-tracking@w3.org Group WG" <public-tracking@w3.org>

On Feb 27, 2012, at 4:02 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> On Feb 27, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Karl Dubost wrote:
>> Le 27 févr. 2012 à 17:56, Roy T. Fielding a écrit :
>>> So, yes, privacy does suffer on the Internet.  If it were not for the
>>> extreme risks of unlawful behavior,
>> There are no extreme risks. FUD.
> Karl, my friend hosted a TOR node until the FBI knocked down his door
> and confiscated all of his computers during the investigation of a child
> pornography ring.  If you don't know what risks are associated with
> anonymizing services, then please don't presume to teach industry about
> privacy.

You have one unlucky friend. My understanding is there was exactly one US confiscation of TOR servers, ever. When the FBI knocked, metaphorically, at Carnegie Mellon's door, just saying "It's a TOR server" was all they needed. Didn't even need to explain TOR. I am told the Pittsburgh FBI are unusually clued. 

Yet I fear I'm not seeing your point. How is kiddie porn linked to DNT? Are you imagining someone would enable DNT but not TOR? I'm not getting the relevance to your anecdote.

Could we (plural) dial down the heat a touch, too, please?

Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2012 02:31:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:38:34 UTC