- “The FBI was the obvious suspect.” What a perfect choice of words. (H/T JB)
- Rescued fighting dogs now “being trained to love.” Don’t really think they need training to love; mainly to trust after the hells they’ve been through.
- Happier dogs — and cats — at The Fluffington Post.
- Are pants-pissing cowards attracted to police work? Or does the job bring it out in them? At least this time when the cops were forced to investigate themselves for shooting dead an unarmed man they didn’t find that “procedures were followed.”
- Summers is out.
- And here’s a nice little act of Simon Jestering.
RE: “The FBI was the obvious suspect.”
I know this has come up here many times, but this is a factual example where you have created LESS privacy for yourself by the very attempt. Sure, encryption and TOR and such generally increase your privacy, but they oft come with an imbalanced quantity of increased targeting and suspicion.
Hard to know what to do in such an environment.
So, if the FBI “took control” of the servers which they say were being used for child pornography that means that during that time the FBI agents were distributing child pornography. Let’s put them all on the registry.
Fat chance, Kent!
[Hard to know what to do in such an environment.]
One thing I get out of this, not sure it’s correct:
1) If you want to browse privately, don’t do it on Windows.
2) If you want to browse privately, don’t use the most popular browser.
3) If you want to browse privately, keep your software up to date.
4) If you want to browse privately, use NoScript.
If I’m not mistaken, any one of the above would have defeated the exploit.
It’s weird that guy tolerated child porn on his servers. I don’t have a lot of sympathy for him even if he called his outfit “Freedom Hosting”.
About that cop, it’s somewhat understandable cops act this way, if you think about it. The more they are tasked with sticking their nose into other peoples’ business, that they shouldn’t be doing, the higher the risk to them, and the more they have to compensate by living on a hair trigger. Of course the answer is to get rid of cops altogether. Anyway in this day and age, it’s madness to run toward a cop for help. Cops don’t help!
The “citizen” didn’t help much either.
IMHO way too many people out there are scared. Lots of them think violence is increasing. In the U.S. it isn’t, except on TV “news.”
I keep seeing stories where people hear someone knocking, and refuse to answer the door. Bad tactics. If it’s a burglar, you’re telling him no one is home. And it could also, as in this case, be someone who needs help.
If the homeowner was scared he could have answered the door without opening it, then when he had the story called 911 and let them handle the situation.
Here’s another:
“Cops trying to subdue an emotionally disturbed man with a long rap sheet accidentally shot two female bystanders outside (NYC) Port Authority Bus Terminal on Saturday night, source said.”
Two “rookie” cops (18 months and three years on the force) fired three shots. Hits on target, 0. So don’t even be on the same street as someone running toward police.
The police commissioner visited the innocents before they were released. ‘(Commissioner) Kelly told reporters little of his conversation with the two victims. “They weren’t 100 percent certain of what happened,” he said, describing their mindset after being shot. “They’re in good spirits,” he added.’
http://nypost.com/2013/09/15/cops-accidentally-shoot-two-bystanders-while-trying-to-subdue-man/
LarryA… I really don’t care if the burglar thinks I’m home or not. I will look out the window and see who is at the door. If I know them, and I want to talk to them, I open the door. If it is a stranger asking for help, I offer to call for help for them. If I don’t know them and don’t want to talk to them, I tell them to go away.
If someone tries to force their way in here… I’ll shoot them.
I like Mama Liberty’s way the best. 🙂
I also don’t think people are more scared. I think there’s more who don’t care and don’t want to deal with whomever’s at the door. Literally and otherwise. I seem to run into more who know what’s going on – just would rather avoid all of it. Lot of head-stickers, as I call em.
Fluffington Post? Heh. Like the hardware store message too. Much better than the usual puerile jokes you see done with that. (Not that there’s anything wrong, sometimes, with puerile jokes.)
@Paul Bonneau
Someone hosting a Tor relay can’t tell what is on it or what passes through it. That’s the point. It’s all encrypted.
A privacy service that examines its customer’s information is worthless.
I’m no expert in Tor hidden service hosting, but it’s certain that all traffic entering and leaving those machines is encrypted. It would be amazing if the data files were not similarly protected on the server. I doubt that Freedom Hosting had any way to know what their customers hosted – it defeats the purpose of Tor.
Whether or not you sympathize with the owner of Freedom Hosting, note that ALL of his customers are now out of business. No trial, no hearing, no judge. Just gone. Satisfied?
@s
I know what TOR relays are supposed to do. Looks like FBI got around it anyway.
If I had an outfit like Freedom Hosting, I’d do my best to police the place to some minimal standard. Of course other people would do differently; there is also something to be said for “anything goes”. But that brings risk of attention too.
As to what they could tell about their users, it’s all dependent on what the contract said. Knowing more certainly does not defeat the purpose of TOR. Free market providers face much different incentives than governments do. They are less likely to throw you in a cage, too.
I’m not satisfied that the customers are out of business, no. I ran into that same thing myself when the money I had stored in 1MDC was stolen by government over alleged “money laundering” by some other customers, never proven.