Slashdot Mirror


Austrian Tor Exit Node Operator Found Guilty As an Accomplice

An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from TechDirt: Three years ago we wrote about how Austrian police had seized computers from someone running a Tor exit node. This kind of thing happens from time to time, but it appears that folks in Austria have taken it up a notch by... effectively now making it illegal to run a Tor exit node. According to the report, which was confirmed by the accused, the court found that running the node violated 12 of the Austrian penal code, which effectively says:"Not only the immediate perpetrator commits a criminal action, but also anyone who appoints someone to carry it out, or anyone who otherwise contributes to the completion of said criminal action." In other words, it's a form of accomplice liability for criminality. It's pretty standard to name criminal accomplices liable for "aiding and abetting" the activities of others, but it's a massive and incredibly dangerous stretch to argue that merely running a Tor exit node makes you an accomplice that "contributes to the completion" of a crime. Under this sort of thinking, Volkswagen would be liable if someone drove a VW as the getaway car in a bank robbery. It's a very, very broad interpretation of accomplice liability, in a situation where it clearly does not make sense.

23 of 255 comments (clear)

  1. Parents are all guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    for giving birth to evil people. Arrest them all!

    1. Re:Parents are all guilty by jythie · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, that is where many 'honor' systems are rooted, that the parents are responsible for the child and thus anything the child does wrong becomes the shame of the family or clan.

    2. Re:Parents are all guilty by ganjadude · · Score: 4, Interesting

      i get what you are saying, but if this guy is running an exit node, wouldnt EVERY other node on the route also be an accomplice? where is verizon and ATT on this list? im sure the NSA intercepted it and let it go through, does that make them accomplices as well? why is this single person the only one in the chain of nodes being held to a different standard??

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    3. Re:Parents are all guilty by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      for giving birth to evil people. Arrest them all!

      To be fair, the birth of each child comes with an 18 year + sentence, often with a similar sentence for the accomplice.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  2. Traffic laundering will soon become a crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We're moving, slowly but surely, towards making your IP address the equivalent of your social security number in the US.

    1. Re:Traffic laundering will soon become a crime by fustakrakich · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not until we get IPv6, which will tattooed on your arm.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  3. It's accomplices all the way down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is the ISP an accomplice too? And the operating system vendor?

    1. Re:It's accomplices all the way down! by jythie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That makes me a bit concerned and curious as to why no ISPs or similar companies got involved in the case. While a judge and jury might not understand the technical details, people working in tech (and their lawyers) probably would and companies should be concerned about how this might come back to them.

    2. Re:It's accomplices all the way down! by Minwee · · Score: 4, Informative

      The judge made the assumption that anyone who wants to be untraceable to law enforcement must be a criminal, which is actually not such a huge stretch.

      That's true. Except for the people who are not criminals, 100% of people using TOR are criminals.

  4. It'll come down to an opinion by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It'll come down to an opinion as to whether or not the use of Tor implies an intent to allow others to break the law. While an anonymizer service itself can be used for both legal and illegal purposes, if the court later finds that its use is far more illegitimate than it is legitimate, then that will dictate how they rule on the matter.

    That's the biggest difference compared to the car analogy, in that the demonstrated legitimate use of cars far, far outweighs the illegitimate use of cars. Using cars is the norm. Using Tor is not the norm, and so then it becomes a matter of scrutinizing what it does, who uses it, and for what purposes.

    Same issues held true for networks like Napster and MegaUpload, and holds true for bit torrent.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  5. Whatever way we want it to be by NReitzel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In the post-911 world, police departments all over the world are moving into Orwellian territory. They spot someone that they "know" is doing a crime, and they go searching for a law to hammer them.

    With laws that don't sunset, and legislative organizations (worldwide) passing more rules and regulations and laws as fast as they can write them down, the state is moving to consolidate it's power. Once, a congressman from the United States said of his constituents, "There are no law-abiding citizens, there are only citizens who haven't yet broken a law."

    Wait for it. The police are choosing to persecute (sic) whomever they want to, and due process seems to be fading into the sunset.

    --

    Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.

    1. Re:Whatever way we want it to be by jklovanc · · Score: 4, Informative

      Once, a congressman from the United States said of his constituents, "There are no law-abiding citizens, there are only citizens who haven't yet broken a law."

      If you are going to quote someone then you need to give a name and, if possible, a reference. Saying "a congressman from the United States" is meaningless. Yes, I did a Google search for that phrase and found nothing.

    2. Re:Whatever way we want it to be by NReitzel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My apologies. I searched myself for the quotation and did not find it. The person in question was Charles Schumer (US Senator), and his remarks were in response to a rather over-the-top NRA assertion that the government was trying to take guns away from "Law Abiding Citizens" subsequent to some multiple shooting event. The event made at least one video outlet -- which is how I saw it -- but apparently was not recorded. This I actually understand, and find nothing nefarious about it -- after all, there was a hugely more serious event to report on.

      Since I was unable to provide an actual citation, I did not "name names" -- and the comment was more to illustrate an attitude by lawmakers (not necessarily Mr Schumer personally) that government should have the power to go after someone that "they think" is a Bad Guy, and screw the legal process.

      In the US, there have been countless cases of cops trying to charge someone recording their actions on video, because having their actions stand up to careful scrutiny seems (to them) to be an undue burden. The current trend towards categorizing all "illegal immigrants" as drug mules is another example. "They are here illegally, right? So we know they've broken a law." Yes, but _drug mules_ ? That's a stretch.

      As a person who witnessed the 1968 events in Chicago, I know that there are some police forces who have the attitude of "We know who the bad guys are and we need to be able to go after them" and the phrase "burden of proof" seems to be missing from their repertoire. Thankfully, in the US, the majority of police forces are not there, at least not yet.

      --

      Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.

  6. Uh no by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Under this sort of thinking, Volkswagen would be liable if someone drove a VW as the getaway car in a bank robbery.

    No. Under this sort of thinking, the owner of a Volkswagen would be liable if someone drove their VW as the getaway car in a bank robbery. And indeed, in some countries you can be held [partially] liable for misuse of your vehicle even if all you did was leave the keys in the car, especially if you have even a passing relationship with the perpetrators.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  7. Run Your Own Node in Austria by terbeaux · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can spin up your own Tor exit node in Austria here: http://lowendbox.com/tag/austria/

    Or, if you prefer, you can just donate to people that are running nodes here: https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq#RelayDonations

  8. Re:Wonderful car analogy! by rotorbudd · · Score: 4, Funny

    What? Read the article?
    This IS slashdot right?

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it, but artillery is addressed to " Whom It May concern"
  9. Re:Does not make sense? by nitehawk214 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Or, in other words, guilty until proven innocent.

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  10. VW as the getaway car in a bank robbery by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    More like arresting a taxi driver for transporting a bank robber when the taxi driver didn't know he was a bank robber.

  11. A few points by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    1. Apparently a final ruling has not been reached. While a court has found the operator guilty it's not clear if that will ultimately hold.

    2. None of TFA provide any details of what the ruling was based on, beyond the TOT node being used for illegal activity by someone else. Without more details, it is impossible to conclude that merely running a TOR node is illegal; the only conclusion from TFA is someone was prosecuted for running one. A relationship between the operator and the user committing fraud, or if the operator new the user was using the node of illegal purposes, is vastly different than merely running a node where a user is using it for illegal activities. The former is much more reasonable to prosecute than the latter.

    3. As others point out, in keeping with /. traditions, the car analogy is bogus.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  12. Re:No, it's not the same as selling cars at all. by Culture20 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Prima: I need to do some dodgy shit.
    Secunda: I am going to offer a resource for people to do dodgy shit.
    Prima: I am going to use your resource to do dodgy shit.
    Secunda: OK, please carry on using it.

    Prima: I need to be anonymous
    Secunda: I offer masks. Masks make you anonymous.
    Prima: I am going to use your resource (thinking only to self: to do dodgy shit.)
    Secunda: I'm glad someone appreciates my fine craftsmanship.

    If a bankrobber robs a bank while wearing a mask purchased from a store, is that mask store held liable? Usually only if the bank robber explicitly said "I'm going to use this mask to do dodgy shit".

    users of the tor network don't notify exit node maintainers what they plan to do with the exit nodes they transfer data from. At best, an exit node maintainer might be able to firewall off certain sites, but that's cumbersome and doesn't prevent 99% of evil use cases.

  13. Very bad car analogy by smooth+wombat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The car analogy is so flawed it really should be removed from the story for this significant reason: cars are designed to move people and stuff. They can be used to commit crimes, but that is not their intended use.

    Tor on the other hand, is explicitly designed to allow people to remain anonymous, to prevent detection. While honest people most certainly use Tor, so do criminals and it is because of Tor's intended purpose that the police are justifying their actions.

    Before anyone flames me, I am not justifying what is taking place. I am only giving a much better explanation than that ridiculous car analogy for why this is taking place.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  14. Dear former colonies of United Kingdom... by denzacar · · Score: 4, Informative

    Most of the world uses something called Civil Law as opposed to your Common Law that you inherited from UK.

    Which is why in most of the world precedents don't carry as much weight as they do in Common Law legal systems like yours, where the rationale for the decision makes each sentence a binding precedent in other courts.

    And that is why this single decision DOES NOT "effectively now make it illegal to run a Tor exit node" in Austria.
    NOR would "Volkswagen be liable if someone drove a VW as the getaway car in a bank robbery".

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  15. Re:govt is guilty by BitZtream · · Score: 3, Informative

    Sigh ... taught ... not 'teached', taught.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager