SAFE Network and Illegal Content


#62

The NSA had a program to tamper the computers or any electronic device you bought online. If you are/were a person of interest, they would redirect the packages to their facilities, do their dirty deed replacing the chips, and then forwarding it to you.

So, not a conspiration theory, it is confirmed.


#63

Yet another reason to shop local and custom build your own box.


#64

Wow. Okay, yes I was prepared for it being true. So even with the SAFE network they can snoop on side channels and tamper with the hardware like that. Well, it may be necessary to have some ways at least for them to keep an eye on heavy criminal activities. But if it turns too Orwellian then that’s really horrible.


#65

I was reading on the SEO discussion about a potential spam flagging system. Perhaps such a system could also target say…ISIS propaganda child porn drug trafficking etc. You know, that way we can still feel good about running MAIDSafe nodes. I think there should be some sort of decentralized governance system. Any thoughts? Should this be its own post? Let me know.


#66

I disagree, I believe that as soon as we start targeting content for breaking one law, we open the floodgates to censoring everything else. Don’t get me wrong, those are all terrible things, but to some world governments so is free speech against their religion, or speaking out against their leaders, etc.

To truly empower free speech, you have to empower all speech, not just the subset you find to be respectable.


#67

Its a difficult line to walk. Perhaps one day when we have a nice AI overlord, things will be different XD


#68

I think we need this as an app but not built into the protocol. I.e. built into safe browser. 99.99% of people want nothing to do with that stuff, a flagging system built into the browser could help protect users from it. That could further be extended as some sort of parental control too if wanted to stop minors visiting adult sites. That way people can choose to use a censored or unlimited browser, it’ll be their choice.


#69

This is true. Look at the “manufacturing errors” that provided the possibility of back door access to your machine in the news this year.


#70

I would point out that right now in Germany copyright violation carpetbaggers (usually German law firms scenting a quick buck or Euro) are going after users of torrents who are uploading/downloading copyrighted video/film content and sending the uploaders/downloaders copyright violation demands. This has been a lucrative moneymaking niche there for years. The way they do it is through accessing ISP user logfiles.

Presumably the same kind of approach could be used for the SAFE network.


#71

There will be no such log files, there would be no way to ask for them, and they couldn’t contain anything useful to start with.


#72

As @JoeSmithJr says ISP log files are meaningless for analysing, except to say you’ve been connecting to a lot of people. Protocol usage is not illegal be it bittorrent protocols or NNTP or safe

Also they do not use ISP log files as such. They join the bittorrent network as a seeder and look at who is joining their computer requesting the content. Then they ask the ISP who belongs to that IP address. No ISP userlog files, just the ISP IP address allocations

Since SAFE doesn’t work that way. A legal shark cannot load the content onto their machine and wait for people to connect to their machine. SAFE doesn’t work like that


#73

I didn’t even touch on this one. It’s been demonstrated years ago that most of those warnings are sent based on IP addresses collected from bittorrent trackers without verifying there is an active client behind that IP address. At the same time, anybody can register any IP address for a torrent (in other words, anybody can frame you) so an IP address on that list means (or, should mean) nothing unless they can show proof that content could be downloaded from a bittorrent client behind that address.