SAFE Network and Illegal Content


#1

So I have a small question. When the SAFE Network eventually supports more space for websites, will we be able to upload whatever pleases us and have no one do anything about it? For example. Would I be able to upload a movie that is copyrighted and not have to worry? I’m talking for torrenting sites too but unless someone develops a torrent client to connect through the SAFE Network. I don’t know. But the general question is: If I do anything illegal but keep it within the SAFE Network, do I need to worry?


Is it true that Maidsafe isn't likely to launch until the latter end of 2018?
I wish this were late year 1999
#2

The goal is to give freedom and privacy for everybody on the network, you should be able to upload whatever you want without anyone ever finding our who uploaded it.

When a user uploads (or saves) a file to the network, via one of the SAFE Network apps, the file is automatically broken up into chunks. These chunks are then encrypted (encoded so that only authorised parties can read it), randomised and stored on the computers of other SAFE Network users. These encrypted chunks are completely unreadable and inaccessible to anyone other than the owner.


#3

Of course you’d have to worry, which part of “illegal” you don’t understand?


#4

There was a time when we thought that TOR could keep our activity private, but all walls can be breached. They will build a better mousetrap. Also, something about keeping all of your eggs in one basket…


#5

Basically what the others said. You can upload whatever you want. Whether you choose to or not is your choice. The law is still the law.

I have doors and windows at my home that keep my private life, private. Doesn’t mean I decide to build meth labs and slaughter prostitutes - same goes here here one would think


#6

Who cares. There is no such thing as “illegal.” Do what you want with it, and accept the consequences.


#7

Exactly and if its bad enough and becomes known then the police will do what they do with the sickos and their encrypted networks. They infiltrate and break the ring. Police only catch the dumb crooks on the internet now, and the others (if they do) by good old police work. Investigation and physical evidence.[quote=“whateveryousayman, post:4, topic:7497”]
There was a time when we thought that TOR could keep our activity private, but all walls can be breached.
[/quote]
And mostly by posing as buyers and tracing back the physical evidence. OR gaining the trust of the crooks and using good old police investigation.

Also TOR had the problem of interfacing with the internet and people using unencrypted packets from the exit node


#8

Hopefully we reach a point where we can discard all Law and start again by consensus. That requires people getting back to the hard work of self responsibility.

‘Crime and Punishment’ needs to be completely re-imagined in flux with Property Rights and ‘Corporations are People’ etc…


#9

Not sure what you mean by there is no such thing as illegal. Please explain.

The problem with all of this we live in very complex societies. But I have a feeling Judge Judy would sort us all out.


#10

SAFE by its design makes it very difficult to trace users and their activities. The level of difficulty increases as the network grows.

Unless you give out personally identifying information, there is little to worry about. Targeted surveillance and infection of you machine is a different story. Learn how to verify that you have an official binary (executable a.k.a .exe) and you solve the infection issue. Give no reason for sophisticated surveillance agencies to target you and you’re okay. At least in most democratic countries that is.

There are some proposals (at least two by me) that would hopefully help to better secure the up and down loaders of public data. At the moment, the current implementation still makes it fairly difficult to determine what public data a user is dealing with.

It is my humble opinion that SAFE is at least if not more secure and anonymous than Tor. When the network grows to a million users, it will put Tors’ anonymity to shame. Even I2P will struggle to keep up. If SAFE becomes as popular as Facebook, their will be little chance of even the most sophisticated agencies seeing anything useful. The amount of resources necessary to do passive surveillance (watching packet flows) will be crazy. Low ROI (return on investment).

Police will have to improve their physical investigatory techniques.

Basically, SAFE will be the best option if you want stay safe. :wink:


#11

The police state wants us to do their work for them. No!


#12

Yes, there is a certain profession within government that have made it that way.


#13

I do understand the whole ‘illegal’ term. But, if it’s on SAFE, is it actually traceable?


#14

Once it land in someones vault, it’s the end for tracking. The original uploader is a ghost. Keep in mind that the only way an investigator can know something illegal exists on SAFE in the first place, is if it has already been uploaded on to the network. So unless they can reverse time, they won’t know who uploaded it. Game over. They lose. So where’s those torrents already. Don’t be scurred. :yum:


#15

If you are the one accessing the public “illegal” data, they would have to be your relay ( first hop ) to find anything useful. They would then have to do a computationally expensive and impractical fingerprint attack. There are two techniques I proposed (pre RFC as David put it) that could easily defeat fingerprinting of both uploaders and downloaders. They’re pretty trivial to implement as well. So only a worldwide surveillance collaborative effort (currently illegal in most democratic countries) and direct computer hacks (also illegal) would provide useful (potentially incriminating) information. Hope that covers your concerns. If not, just hit me back. :v:


#16

Unfortunately legal in Australia for ASIO to put malware/spyware on anyone’s computer, without their knowledge, if they “think” it will help in their investigations of another party. Also ASIO can now legally break the law. NSW police can do secret searches of anyone’s house. And Australia is supposed to be a free nation. HA HA HA


#17

My point is, it doesn’t matter. You always have to worry.

I didn’t say don’t do it, I said be prepared. No one here would pay a fine (or worse) for you.


#18

That depends. Do you count your computer as being on SAFE? If someone installed a keylogger, does it matter at all that you’re using SAFE?


#19

Thinking of journalists and whistleblowers needing to weigh up risks. Life in prison or worse if they get it wrong. Will it not be a fundamental question, preferably from a moralism free technical perspective, to be as definitive as possible about anonymity on Safenet as it evolves? Isn’t it a cornerstone of the network? Vital points are being made about how a keylogger and other such vulnerabilities can leave users unsafe at this stage in development. These are the things people need to be aware of. The question of “anon safety” can suffer “mission creep” at times into areas of morality,philosophy etc. Whether people are safe, regardless of motivations, on Safenet has to be an ever present issue.


#20

You have to much confidence in humankind… Only works with smart moral people, very few of those!