Hacker News Reader

Comment by Retric | Hacker News Reader

Aiding and abetting someone breaking the law is often illegal. Consider someone building and selling physical lock picks, even with a clear legal use case it's considered a grey area.

One important consideration is whether your state, local, or national laws consider possession to be prima facie intent to commit a crime. http://lockwiki.com/index.php/Legal_issues

View on HN

I can't find any reference to contributory violations of CFAA. Lockpicks are a special case, as they are specifically called out in law.

Why would this be banned but Tor remain legal?

Tools that have both legal and illegal uses have a lot more latitude. Consider TOR was funded by the US government in the first place; they clearly had non-criminal intent in mind.

It's hard to picture a 'legal' use for something that is tied to a proprietary API.

Being used with that API when there is permission to do such and being an example to help someone who is building a similar access to the API (with permission).

Also, TOR was funded with illegal uses in mind. Beneficial to the US government, perhaps even legal with the US, but illegal in their intended application.

> Also, TOR was funded with illegal uses in mind. Beneficial to the US government, perhaps even legal with the US, but illegal in their intended application.

In what way is browsing the internet without someone recording your every move illegal? You may choose to use the anonymity for illegal purposes. But you may also choose to use your car or house for illegal purposes and no one says that these should be illegal.

I think you and Lawtonfogle are in agreement. For example, anonymity on the internet is illegal (or very close to it) in China, and Tor is meant to circumvent that law. Thus, it was designed for an illegal purpose as far as the Chinese government sees it.

>In what way is browsing the internet without someone recording your every move illegal?

Tor was, in part, made for countries where that is illegal.

It's the "in part" bit that is key (also the fact that this is legal in some countries). Where a tool has legitimate uses it tends to be legal (but may have restrictions placed upon its use - an example from the physical world is machetes) whereas when something has only illegitimate uses it tends to be made illegal (e.g. flick knives). Tor is the first category, some illegal use and some legal. An API for a proprietary service is tied to that services and can only be used to access it if this access is not allowed then why should the tool exist?

It has legal uses that I've already pointed out. First, it is legal to use by anyone with permission. Second, it serves as an example of code for others to learn from.

As for bans on knives and such, I consider such bans just as unjustified.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com