Quote from: wasserman99 on September 14, 2014, 06:37:18 PM

Quote from: Bizzaran on September 14, 2014, 03:51:56 PM

Quote from: superbd on September 14, 2014, 02:39:16 PM

Quote from: MightyStorm on September 14, 2014, 01:28:17 PM

Mike Hearn is also the guy that is proposing to build blacklisting into Tor, as well as reduce the fungibility of Bitcoin with built in taint tracking and rejection.

What is wrong with a tor node wanting to block something going through their computer and network? It is their connection you're using and are under no obligation to forward any traffic to you in the first place while they risk themselves, and you're still free to use a different node.

Because it's fucking TOR. Why are they operating a TOR node at all if they want to block shit? That's not what TOR is for. They should take their computer and their connection to a different network.

This is correct. TOR is designed to send all data from node to node and from the exit node to it's intended recipient. Exit nodes are not suppose to monitor to look at any of the data that is passing through it. This is part of the TOR protocol.

If an exit node does not follow the protocol then it poses a threat to the overall system and should be excluded excluded from the network, similar to how a bitcoin node that does not follow the protocol.

The TOR papers actually assume that the network is partially compromised. Kind of the trust less part.