Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Web Hosting For Privacy Activists?

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the haven-in-a-data-storm dept.

Privacy 285

BritishColumbian writes "I'm thinking about setting up a Web site driven by user submissions. I was wondering which locations have the most liberal (i.e., libertarian) privacy laws. There are some great hosts in the US, however there have been so many FBI requests for user data that I don't want a server hosted under US jurisdiction. Does anyone have any thoughts/suggestions as to a suitable jurisdiction? It doesn't look like Sealand's HavenCo is guaranteed to be privacy-friendly any more."

cancel ×

285 comments

ob (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195554)

What's wrong with geocities? :p

here's what I do (5, Funny)

friedman101 (618627) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195560)

I host my website from a mini server taped to the back of the toilet in a local coffee shop with free wifi. I change the battery twice a month.

interesting? crack smoking mods.. (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195582)

the shit is funny as fuck hahaa

Re:here's what I do (3, Funny)

Mansing (42708) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195636)

"I host my website from a mini server taped to the back of the toilet in a local coffee shop with free wifi. I change the battery twice a month."

I hope your server doesn't try to "signal" the server in the next stall ....

Re:here's what I do (5, Funny)

QuasiEvil (74356) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195816)

"I hope your server doesn't try to "signal" the server in the next stall ...."

Why not? Can't servers one day dream of being a senator, too?

Unfortunately... (5, Funny)

bwd234 (806660) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195562)

I don't want a server hosted under US jurisdiction. ...as of lately, nearly the entire planet is under US jurisdiction.

Re:Unfortunately... (5, Funny)

Adambomb (118938) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195618)

It's as if a million chinese officials burst out in laughter....

and then kept on laughing.

Re:Unfortunately... (5, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195764)

Frankly I doubt that you will find anyplace more liberal than the US.
A lot of countries in the EU will bust you for anything that they consider "hate speech" not that I wouldn't mind never having to see it myself it is still political speech. Considering Europe's history I can understand why they are more than a little sensitive over hate speech. Canada also has hate speech laws last time I checked. I am not sure about all the countries in Latin America but most get a little bent over criticism of their governments and or the Catholic Church.
The middle east? Well just don't make fun of Islam and you will be just fine. Africa? Well that probably depends on the nation. Not a great history of Human rights in most of those Nations.
Asia? Well China is a big no. Japan, and Taiwan I have no idea. Austriala and New Zealand maybe a as liberal as the US but I think they are closer to most EU nations according the Wikipedia they are.
Switzerland maybe?

The US does tend to be more strict on sexual content but is probably still one of the most free when it comes to Political speech. Of course an anti-war protester being asked to go to a free speech zone or get a permit really doesn't care about an neo-nazi in France being put into jail for wearing a patch.

Re:Unfortunately... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195846)

The US is good on free speech but it is not good on privacy which is the point of this article. As far as privacy is concerned, Privacy International ranks [wikipedia.org] both Germany and Canada very highly. I'd recommend Canada to get around Germany's prohibited speech laws.

Re:Unfortunately... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195880)

Frankly I doubt that you will find anyplace more liberal than the US

Bwahah ahah ahahahaha hahahahah ahahaha
Bwah ahahaha hahaha haha hahaha
Bwa hahahaha hahah ahaha
Bwah ahah ahahah
Bwah ahaha
Haha

Now that was a good one. Seriously.

It all depends on the type of content. (5, Interesting)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195802)

Bluntly put, but not untrue.

Basically, you're going to have to pick the least-bad option. The idea of 'data havens' where conventional meatspace law doesn't apply is sadly seeming more and more like a lost concept. It seemed possible during the early 90s, when government and the big corporate interests really hadn't caught on to 'the Internet,' but now that they have, it's going to become more and more regulated, just like every other area of human endeavor. It was fun while it lasted, I guess, and it'll make a neat story to tell our kids about, but the party's basically over.

Where you want to go depends on the specifics of what you're doing. Political speech, particularly political speech directed at other countries, is relatively well-protected both in the U.S. and the E.U. Although I'm pretty unhappy with the current security paranoia here in the U.S., I think it's unlikely that you'll get in trouble unless you actually start advocating 'direct action' (terrorism) or have a cozy relationship with people that do. In terms of formal legislative safeguards on political speech, the U.S. has a more absolute freedom-of-speech doctrine than many European countries and Canada.* Where you will run into trouble in the U.S. (viz political speech) is when you are saying things that can be construed not as speech but as 'action' or as appeals to action. Saying things that are highly politically unpopular in the U.S. may get you put under surveillance or monitoring, but probably won't land you in a lot of legal trouble or get you locked up. Bottom line: if you're looking to deny the Holocaust or write nasty-but-true things about just about anyone, the U.S. is the place to do it.

Where the E.U. becomes the superior venue is if you're doing things that would be a crime under certain U.S. intellectual-property laws drawn up by the megacorporations that essentially own large chunks of Congress. Hollywood is a double-edged sword: it likes freedom for political speech, but really hates freedom if it might negatively impact this quarter's bottom line. Thus while you can advocate genocide in the U.S., linking to copyrighted material may land you in prison. For that sort of thing, you're better off in Europe, probably as far north as you can get. (E.g., Sweden.) You're also probably better off in Europe if you're looking to do something that's edgy and involves sex; I'm not sure that the laws per se are a whole lot better, but overall attitudes may result in those laws not being used as aggressively to bludgeon you.

There are more minor specialty venues that you might want to consider if what you're doing involves money changing hands. Antigua in particular seems to be a popular choice for shady financial-transaction sites (cf. 1MDC) as well as gambling. Exactly how tolerant they'll be of (U.S) copyright-violating material, as a result of the recent trade decisions, remains to be seen. I wouldn't hold your breath for a Bittorrent Free Zone, though.

I admit to not knowing a whole lot about privacy laws in Asian countries but I get the impression that they're more restrictive than the U.S. in many cases. One datapoint: 2chan, the popular Japanese imageboard, is run out of the U.S. to shield it from Japanese authorities and law.

Really, I don't think there's any place you can go where you'll get 'total freedom,' except maybe Freenet (and it's really slow and impractical to use). You need to think hard about what type of content is going to be the most problematic, and then choose a hosting location that's going to be least hostile to it.

* To wit: Many European countries prohibit certain types of political speech under the guise of 'hate speech' laws and anti-Nazism/fascism policies. Although Canada isn't nearly as bad, their Bill of Rights-equivalent document, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, "guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society," a caveat that in my opinion makes it practically meaningless, since it doesn't constitute an absolute guarantee of anything. Most Commonwealth nations also, I believe, have looser standards for libel and slander than the U.S. does, and don't follow the U.S. doctrine of truth being (generally) an absolute defense against libel.

Re:It all depends on the type of content. (1)

ParaShoot (992496) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195884)

Mod parent up - pretty much answers the question.

Re:It all depends on the type of content. (1)

markov_chain (202465) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195974)

Yeah, the GP nailed it. Mod up, disable comments, and let's move on to the next article!

Re:It all depends on the type of content. (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196068)

Wow. This is among the better posts I've ever seen on /.
Thanks for your time writing that.

Re:It all depends on the type of content. (4, Informative)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196208)

Basically, Sweden may be a good place, as long as you don't think about doing child pornography or actively breaking the law with actions that can awake RIAA, MPAA or the Swedish STIM, but from the question I assume that this is mostly a political issue. Of course you may not actively push for violent actions either (like blowing up the electrical grid, Hoover dam or Mt Rushmore. But being an annoyance like peeing on the flag or similar actions are just ignored.

There are some laws that loosely requests that members of a bulletin board shall be known, but I have never heard about anyone being even brought to court in such cases and the verification is at most an email address, and considering the volatility of email addresses that's no big problem. The "Freedom of speech" is relatively strong, and as long as you don't actively push for breaking the law in ways that can be considered worthy to being brought to court it's no big issue.

Having a system with a moderation (maybe like the Slashdot moderation) may still be a good idea to be able to cool down anything that goes over the edge.

There have been some fuzz earlier about the Swedish site Flashback [flashback.net] for promoting cracks and computer criminality, but it actually hasn't ended up into anything of substance. Maybe you even can have your own forum at that site! In most cases the police will just look and thing "Well - another set of nuts - and go for some more coffee...". Considering that there are bigger fish to fry and the end result of the Pirate Bay story it will take a lot of pressure before anything happens if somebody in the US wants to do a crackdown. And it's likely to hit the newspapers too even before there is time to do something... And essentially the police is more into the watching part and avoids the acting part since it means paperwork. And they have better things to watch for than a bulletin board where the most of the discussion will fall under the freedom of speech anyway.

Crimes that will put you on the radar of the police are more like driving under the influence (0.02% limit), speeding (fixed speed cameras at random locations on major roads) and drugs, both narcotics and illegal sales of prescription drugs but I don't think that the first two of these will apply for a web server hosting anyway.

Re:It all depends on the type of content. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22196226)

Freenet might be slow and impractical now, but internet speeds will be vastly improving without you average website using much more resources.

The main problems with freenet are:
1. Websites are static, there is no change once they are uploaded although you can check for newer ones, forums and such cannot exist (although there is a kind of usenet system which is more of a dodgy hack that a proper system)
2. Slow, messages can take days to reach the boards
3. Missing data, since data is retained only by the amount it is accessed things can get lost

Point 1 is something that the Freenet team are working on, it is quite a pain. There really needs to be a way to have almost direct access to a server but routing it anonymously. Travel time needs to be much less than it is now.

Point 2, As I said above the internet is getting faster, but websites size hasn't increased at the same rate. In Japan the most popular file sharing program is Winny, a P2P Darknet based on the similar ideas. Filesharing uses a lot of bandwidth and Darknets are slow, but thanks to the insanely fast internet they get over there its mainstream. Freenet itself will hopefully also improve the network architecture.

Point 3, Currently a Freenet cache is 1gb by default, In japan the darknets (not specifically whinny since the author got arrested and now there are others) have more like 40gb. Hard drives are getting bigger (although so is the datashared).

Freenet probably isn't the solution, but perhapse something that is designed in a more realistic way rather than for lofty ideas of 100% bullet proof anonymity could work. For instance it might be necessary to allow the network to know a larger number of nodes and to form optimum routing (ie you connect to nodes that are closer, or have a better route to the content you are after). This makes it possible to find more people who are running nodes but not what they are hosting. Freenet was designed to help bypass China censorship type scenarios, not for anonymous Filesharing or message boards. There needs to be some kind of seeder mode to ensure data is never lost.

Tor (4, Informative)

Lally Singh (3427) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195566)

Tor [torproject.org] has a few blog hosts available. That way nobody would know who's hosting it. Of course, only tor clients could see the blog....

OTOH, you could just create an account on blogspot while you're on Tor, and only post to it via Tor. That should keep you kinda safe, as long as you don't reveal yourself on the blog.

Re:Tor (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195612)

Tor has the added benefit that since you don't know who's running your entry and exit nodes, you can easily be compromised by a nice MITM attack and have your blog taken over with ease.

Good thinking, 3427! You should totally start your own blog, and call it "Horrible Fucking Advice with Yours Truly".

Re:Tor (3, Insightful)

robo_mojo (997193) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195760)

Have you ever heard of SSL?

Do you always click on "OK" when a bad certificate warning comes up on your browser?

Re:Tor (4, Interesting)

irc.goatse.cx troll (593289) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195864)

You're pretty much stuck with self signed certs though, which means that first time you confirm it could be a MITM, and unless you store the cert permanently the next time you hit the site without having it around is another chance to get MITMed.

A better idea would be to just keysign all your posts, but even then, do you want undeniable association to your posts? If its worth using tor for, maybe you're better off letting your messages stand on their own merit instead of needing the trustworthiness of your 'anonymous' name.

Re:Tor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195924)

you could just create an account on blogspot while you're on Tor, and only post to it via Tor. That should keep you kinda safe, as long as you don't reveal yourself on the blog.
Yes, but that doesn't keep your readers safe unless they are also using Tor. And since blogspot is hosted in the US, it could easily be compromised by federal warrant-less searches (since the only people who care about privacy must be terrorists and you know there is going to be at least one non-US citizen reading which will be more than enough to trigger the Patriot Act provisions).

Re:Tor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22196024)

You need to be a bit careful about this. The NSA runs a significant number of the tor nodes and they may be able to use traffic analysis to find the IP address of your blog and once they have that they may be able to cause you some problems. (Assuming they know how to contact you blog through tor they can inject requests to it and record IP addresses contacted by their tor nodes. By trying this numerous times and using different packet size they should have a reasonable chance of figuring out where you are hosted.) The NSA isn't interested in exactly the same stuff as the FBI, so it might not be a big concern of yours.

Have you considered Venezuela? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195574)

They don't seem particularly friendly to the US government these days yet still have enough ties and technology for a website. Cuba or North Korea would be out as options for obvious reasons.

Re:Have you considered Venezuela? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22196000)

Hugo Chavez shut down Venezuelan television stations because he didn't like their content. Why would you ever host a server there?

Got any more bad advice?

Re:Have you considered Venezuela? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22196030)

If his content is aimed at the US government, I don't see the Chavez administration caring. Heck, they might chip in.

Why!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195580)

Why do you hate our freedoms?

Re:Why!? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195730)

Why do you hate our freedoms?

Because those freedoms have turned into nothing more than a public illusion of freedom.

The freedom to do only what the government and big business wants is not freedom.

If the founding fathers were around today, they would find more in common here with China than with the nation that they set up.

Re:Why!? (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196018)

Bah, the founding fathers set up a system where women had no right to vote and slavery was legal.

We are significantly more free than we were in 1789.

Nearly free speech (5, Informative)

WK2 (1072560) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195590)

https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/ [nearlyfreespeech.net] They will allow you to pay in cash, anonymously.

Re:Nearly free speech (4, Informative)

lexarius (560925) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195628)

Seconded. I'm also fond of their "pay for what you use" cost model. I stuck a $20 in a website six or seven months ago, and that has paid for everything including domain name, MySQL process, bandwidth, etc and still going. Of course, the site in question is a private site meant for only a few people so it doesn't get much traffic, but the rates are fairly competitive for higher amounts of traffic as well. Additionally, you can buy "bandwidth buckets", which can (hopefully) get you through a Slashdotting without draining your coffers too much.

Otherwise, there's always Freenet. Decentralized anonymous content hosting. Not quite The Web, but if you need it, it's there.

Re:Nearly free speech (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22196042)

Actually Freenet is not that great any more. The community totally fragmented with the 0.7 closed-net development. I won't explain the whole deal here because there is a lot of information about the issues.

So basically most people are still on the older 0.5 release while development is trying to push the newer crappier 0.7 stuff. It's just a big mess.

Re:Nearly free speech (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195952)

still won't beat the http://freenetproject.org/ [freenetproject.org] that actually nowadays works quite ok, even tough it requires users to set up some things first and then it is a bit slow to use.

at least stuff doesn't get taken down that easily.

Re:Nearly free speech (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22196052)

That means the hoster is Anonymous, but it doesn't mean the users are if they request the logs from the hosting company. They could also track the hoster from those logs (ie what ip logged in with an admin account).

If the servers are still inside the us then they run a high chance of being siezed.

Personally I think the Pirate Bay should go into website hosting.

Freenet is also a great idea, but its slow and doesn't allow for user generated content in websites (needs special message board software for two way communication, messages can take days to actually reach the boards and it seems to me that you can end up missing a lot of them) however they recently added the insecure mode that allows for connecting to random nodes at start, previously you had to actually goto a IRC channel and negotiate with people (or bots) to get onto Freenet, now you can just use random nodes.

Its also bit counter intuitive for end users, such as people not understanding proxies. It might be cool if someone was to take a build of Firefox, strip out direct internet access, embed the proxy into it and add the messaging board software (or better yet make it so the websites can accept data and remove the need for specialized message board software).

Otherwise you could make everyone accessing your site use Tor or a proxy, kind of the reverse of most sites that block that stuff, but you run the risk of a Tor node not yet being add to a list preventing some people from posting.

xs4all.nl (5, Informative)

Incadenza (560402) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195608)

xs4all.nl is brave enough to face $cientology in a 10-year lasting court case [xs4all.nl] . And winning!

Re:xs4all.nl (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195982)

Google's Translate Page into English worked extraordinarily well.

"The final in the legal struggle of the Church of Scientology against XS4ALL and Karin Spaink is today by the Supreme Court once again decides in favour of XS4ALL and Spaink. After 10 years this is an end to a long process in which Scientology with offences and penalties were trying to win the fight...."

Its cold down there though (2, Funny)

LM741N (258038) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195634)

My bet on the premier hosting location will be Antarctica. Think of the HVAC bills a server farm would save. Plus its neutral territory.

Nowhere (3, Insightful)

bobbonomo (997543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195658)

Well basically nowhere!

Let's say you find a hosting company in a country that is very libertarian and will not comply with any request for info.

The routers to that place can be sniffed here in North America (or anywhere along the route) and voila the trick is done. Not as easy as getting logs but...

If your subjects are that hot, then an easy break-in into the premises of that hosting company. (or a bribe). Remember Watergate?

Re:Nowhere (3, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195800)

I don't understand this usage of the word "libertarian." In a truly libertarian system, the webhost would simply sell your personal info to the highest bidder. If everybody is free to do whatever they want, what right do you have to prevent them?

Re:Nowhere (3, Informative)

PresidentEnder (849024) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195850)

In a truly libertarian system, they wouldn't dare do that, because then nobody would use their services; furthermore, they'd be afraid of retaliation.

Re:Nowhere (1)

poopdeville (841677) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195892)

In a truly libertarian system, they wouldn't dare do that, because then nobody would use their services; ...

They wouldn't? It doesn't seem to stop American companies.

Re:Nowhere (4, Insightful)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195856)

I don't understand this usage of the word "libertarian." In a truly libertarian system, the webhost would simply sell your personal info to the highest bidder. If everybody is free to do whatever they want, what right do you have to prevent them?
Well, they would certainly be free to do that, but if their business was predicated on a guarantee of security, it wouldn't be a very rational thing to do. They'd protect you just as long as it was profitable to do so; until the revenue hit from the bad PR of selling you out was less than they'd be paid to sell you out.

This is essentially how most commercial webhosts in the U.S. operate as it is. They'll protect you if you're just irritating some guy whose only weapon is to write angry letters, but the second you tick off someone with a lot of lawyers and cash to burn, you're up the creek without a paddle.

Re:Nowhere (2, Insightful)

poopdeville (841677) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195912)

Well, they would certainly be free to do that, but if their business was predicated on a guarantee of security, it wouldn't be a very rational thing to do. They'd protect you just as long as it was profitable to do so; until the revenue hit from the bad PR of selling you out was less than they'd be paid to sell you out.

But who says their business would be predicated on a guarantee of security? Extreme privacy is a niche market. Most people just want a fast connection. You are unlikely to find an ISP anywhere that promises extreme privacy unless it is mandated by law. Sweden is a good choice. They have "strong" as opposed to "Libertarian" privacy laws.

Re:Nowhere (1)

Kamineko (851857) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196250)

That's actually a pretty profound answer when you think of it.

You can host nowhere. Think about it. You can't host anywhere, but you can host 'nowhere'.

All you need to do is find somewhere which counts as 'nowhere'.

stay anonymous (4, Insightful)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195664)

hosting in another country won't save you. if they find out who you are the government will just arrest you anyway, they don't even need a real reason these days.

Re:stay anonymous (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195768)

The trick is to host the server in one country, live in another and have the users in a third. The people who go after you usually have to go through at least 2 authorities to get to you.

Re:stay anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195806)

Except if your users are in a third country chances are your political speech is reaching the wrong audience.

I know a place (1)

dr_strang (32799) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195674)

Try Kinakuta.

world governments (0, Troll)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195682)

go after terrorist organizations, child pornographers, etc.

if you are hosting such things, you deserve to be hunted down

but with your jibe at "libertarian" one assumes you are the usual privacy absolutist who simply doesn't understand the government has no interest in you. it inflates your ego to think anyone in society or the government actually feels threatened by you

it is of course evil for governments to oppress people just for speaking their minds

luckily for you, unless you are in iran or china, no one is going to do that

people actually do evil things in this world, and governments actually go after them for that. and that's a good thing

i know that's a really radical wacky concept i just put forth there and it clashes with your mythology about government oppressing you just for the hell of it, but you can safely ignore me. i'm obviously a brainwashed sheeple or an advance unit of the illuminati

some people just need hysterical melodrama to make their lives feel meaningful i guess

oh, and for saying this, i'm obviously a neocon loving propaganda addled fear loving monster right?

i couldn't possibly be saying this form a point of view who holds both neocons and privacy absolutists in contempt, right?

Re:world governments (1)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195712)

it is of course evil for governments to oppress people just for speaking their minds

luckily for you, unless you are in iran or china, no one is going to do that


Right, because oppression is a magically constrained force that stops at national boundaries. It flies around the world looking for countries to land on, and says to itself, "Iran, China, those look like good places to settle ... but not the USA, oh no! That's the Land Of The Free(tm)! I couldn't possibly establish myself there!"

any government can oppress (-1, Troll)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195740)

now i would like for you to relate to me a realistic comparison from your mind of western governments controlling speech versus iran or china

go ahead

Re:any government can oppress (3, Insightful)

xstonedogx (814876) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195836)

Nazi Germany 1933-1945. Thanks for playing!

that was 60 years ago retard (-1, Troll)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195906)

you win arguments by pointing to something that happened 60 years ago?

if that is relevant, do you consider the current german government more or less oppressive than the us government?

oh RIGHT, things change in 60 years

maybe your comment has no meaning?

what a fucktard

Re:that was 60 years ago retard (1)

xstonedogx (814876) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195940)

No, I win arguments by using ironic ad hominem arguments.

oh yeah, you beat me (0, Troll)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195980)

your ironic ad hominem has totally destroyed my pov, i am slayed

?!

Re:that was 60 years ago retard (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196100)

Best comeback ever.

Hey, I'm gonna start using his argument for everything: that was 60 years ago!

The human genome has changed significantly in 60 years, and those old behaviors are all dead and gone. Hell, my grandfather is 80 and he looks NOTHING like he did in those pictures from the war. Proof that his DNA changed.

Re:that was 60 years ago retard (1)

aix tom (902140) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196086)

>things change in 60 years

The change from a free democracy to a dictatorship in 1930s Germany took just a few years, though.

It was in memory of that quick change that German has had some of the strictest privacy laws and checks on the government until some years ago.

And now they are slowly being demolished one by one on the grounds that "We don't need them, because the government isn't evil", and everyone seems to have forgotten how quickly a government might turn evil when there are not strict laws in place to stop it.

Re:any government can oppress (1)

irc.goatse.cx troll (593289) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195934)

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. - MLK, Letter from a Birmingham Jail (1963)

which in your mind has turned into (0, Troll)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195992)

a crime on the level of jaywalking here must be fought tooth and nail, but outright genocide far away is to be yawned at

Re:world governments (1)

Matt867 (1184557) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195718)

You're obviously a neocon loving propaganda addled fear loving monster.

right on (0, Troll)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195898)

why think about a subject when you can kneejerk your idiotic stereotypes and live on in blind propaganda

oh sorry: propaganda is only a tool of neocons

heaven forbid i should suggest it exist elsewhere, or that is exists in you, right?

now if you will excuse me, i have to get back to sucking dick cheney's cock and drinking oil from the skulls of iraqi children

zzzzzz

Re:right on (1)

xstonedogx (814876) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195970)

why think about a subject when you can kneejerk your idiotic stereotypes and live on in blind propaganda

Indeed.

but with your jibe at "libertarian" one assumes you are the usual privacy absolutist who simply doesn't understand the government has no interest in you. it inflates your ego to think anyone in society or the government actually feels threatened by you

i know that's a really radical wacky concept i just put forth there and it clashes with your mythology about government oppressing you just for the hell of it, but you can safely ignore me. i'm obviously a brainwashed sheeple or an advance unit of the illuminati


Some people just need hysterical melodrama to make their lives feel meaningful, I guess. Thank you for giving me my fill for the day.

Re:world governments (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195744)

neocon loving propaganda addled fear loving monster

exactly (0, Troll)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195876)

why think about a subject when you can kneejerk your retarded stereotypes and live on in blind propaganda

oh sorry: propaganda is only a tool of neocons, heaven forbid i should suggest it exist elsewhere, or that is exists in you, right?

now if you will excuse me, i have to get back to sucking dick cheney's cock and drinking oil from the sjulls of iraqi children

pfffffffft

Re:world governments (3, Funny)

Stanislav_J (947290) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195754)

go after terrorist organizations, child pornographers, etc.

if you are hosting such things, you deserve to be hunted down

but with your jibe at "libertarian" one assumes you are the usual privacy absolutist who simply doesn't understand the government has no interest in you. it inflates your ego to think anyone in society or the government actually feels threatened by you

it is of course evil for governments to oppress people just for speaking their minds

luckily for you, unless you are in iran or china, no one is going to do that

people actually do evil things in this world, and governments actually go after them for that. and that's a good thing

Right on!! I am all in favor of the government doing everything they can to hunt down and kill terrorists, child molesters, and people who type in all lower-case and consider periods optional.

Re:world governments (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195814)

To me it sounds like he's looking to host material which might be subject to a dmca complaint. He is probably looking for a country where the material he's hosting doesn't violate the law and he's under no obligation to turn over the personal information of users.

sweden, slovenia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195690)

judging by the pirate bay legal responses and general attitude, i think that in Sweden it must be possible to have something more on the private side...

on the other hand, i once saw a Brazilian website which said in the footer:
"want to sue me? good luck. we're hosted in Slovenia." - and a nice little flag that said "proud to be Slovenian" :-)

how does this work (3, Insightful)

KevMar (471257) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195728)

If your server is hosted in a safe area but you (the owner/responcible operator) reside in the US. Can the FBI contact or require you to provide that info?

Having it hosted in a safe are only protects the hosting company. The FBI will not get anything from them, the next step is for them to contact you (if they can figure out who you are).

Atleast that way, you know when the FBI is trying to get info about you or your users.

Canada (2, Informative)

Secret Rabbit (914973) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195742)

Canada has wonderful privacy laws. I recommend checking us out. Of course, you should really investigate the specific company you might wish to host with. Because, many will submit to such foreign requests.

Btw, if privacy is really your concern, you should at most co-locate and use disk encryption, etc. Also, if you aren't in the physical US, you should consider hosting the site yourself. That's really the only way you'll know for sure...

how about hosting overseas in Singapore? (0)

peterjacksonb (1227540) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195756)

How about hosting it overseas? In singapore? Check out this: http://hosting.my-useful-links.info/ [my-useful-links.info]

Re:how about hosting overseas in Singapore? (4, Insightful)

oyenstikker (536040) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195882)

Singapore?! The you-must-register-to-buy-chewing-gum country? I don't think so.

Sealand or Tor (3, Informative)

Yahma (1004476) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195762)

You have a few options, the first being Havenco [havenco.com] in the micro-nation of Sealand, which is an old WWII off shore platform that claims sovereignty. They have not, however, been recognized by other states, leaving their international legal status in limbo. They do claim, however, to not be under the jurisdiction of other nations laws.

Your second and cheaper option is hosting via Tor [torproject.org] network. There are a few blogs and other sites hosted via Tor, although there are some technical difficulties involved.

Be aware, if your privacy blog angers a powerful entity such as China, they can choose to just block all traffic to your site, rather than forcing your site offline.

--
Boycott Nokia [nrwspd.de] - Stop corporate Greed. Nokia, connecting people with the unemployment line.

Re:Sealand or Tor (1)

popirate (778348) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195994)

If you'd bothered to read the summary, you'd see he considered and rejected Sealand/Havenco.

Cyberbunker Republic Alternative (2, Informative)

RobinGood (757807) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196246)

I have been looking for such an alternative for quite some time as you can read from here http://tinyurl.com/66488 [tinyurl.com] . But to my dismay haven't found anything really interesting. Last month I received an email referencing my post and offering some secure and politically independent hosting solution. It is called the Republic Cyberbunker and it may be an interesting alternative. CyberBunker was built as a NATO base in 1955. In 1995 it was sold to a company under the control of it's present royal family and government but it never officially became Dutch territory. You need to evaluate it and check it yourself. At EUR 350.- per month you can get a dedicated server inside a supposedly de-militarized zone that is outside any official government territory. There is a Skype number and I have exchanged a few emails with them without trouble. You can find more info at http://www.cb3rob.net/ [cb3rob.net] and http://www.republic-cyberbunker.org/ [republic-cyberbunker.org]

GNU.org (1)

tristian_was_here (865394) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195788)

who hosts gnu.org?

Iran, Land of the Free (1)

j35ter (895427) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195812)

try http://www.ouriran.com/ [ouriran.com] and just try to imagine the mullahs (circumcised) answer to an american government request :)

Dumb (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195822)

You don't want to host in a country with "libertarian" privacy laws, as those countries have no privacy laws, meaning there is no real incentive for a company to protect your privacy from anyone who asks. Sure, they probably wouldn't give just any random schmuck your records, but they would probably give it to their government if asked, just like in the US.

Go with Sweden. They have "strong" privacy laws.

What about the moon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195826)

Hosting costs are quite expensive at the moment, but getting cheaper all the time.

Word is that NASA are budgeting a couple of shuttle flights to ship over some servers. But the chinese deals look better.

IANAL (5, Insightful)

Mawginty (882393) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195828)

And you might consider consulting one (if you have the money). You might also consider exactly what sorts of liability you'll be exposed to and search for jurisdictions with the most lax regulations in that area. You say that your site is going to be driven by user submissions . . . are you worried about copyright? You say you're worried about the FBI requesting user data, is there any particular reason you think the FBI will ask for your user data (that is, will you be requesting submissions on political/revolutionary/Islam topic areas? I suppose one could even piece together a user submission website dedicated to the discussion of criminal activity and how one might go about practicing crime . . . clearly an exposed place to be).

Also remember it isn't only the FBI that can compel disclosure of user identities. The Think Secret/Apple, Inc. lawsuit proved that. A foreign jurisdiction might make it really hard for the government to get at user data, but make it really easy for private parties to do so in a lawsuit. Also consider, however, that if your servers are in a foreign jurisdiction then U.S. constitutional guarantees may not apply (you might say that they don't apply here anymore, but I would submit that they protect you at least a little bit). That could mean that if the government wants your user data, and the servers are outside the U.S., they could tap/hack/physically break in and get the data they want w/o even the pretense of judicial sanction, and w/o even the possibility of court action for you.

My point here is that jurisdictions treat privacy differently across subject areas and differently depending on who's asking or taking the data. Find the subject area that your website most squarely fits under, and then find a jurisdiction with the most protective privacy laws, on the whole and against everyone you're scared of, for that subject.

Serbia (1)

vampirbg (1092525) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195844)

You can host it in Serbia. You can just leave wrong identification data (someone form Serbia) and as FBI cannot order Serbian hosts to give them server logs you should be ok. Also, they cannot prosecute Serbian citizen living in Serbia as they have no jurisdiction here. They can kidnap him but that is impossible if he never existed :)

Re:Serbia (1)

j35ter (895427) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196038)

Sure, you could do that! still, should the FBI start asking questions about who is responsible for this site, you can bet your arse that the Serbian government will protest about such an outrageous request! Next day the main political media (politikin zabavnik,blic) will pronounce you, , a hero of the people. Together with a full article (with picture) about you - and your address (for fan mail, of course). Should you be in Serbia at the time, you can bet that thousands will protest your extradition to the US. Alternately, you will disappear for a while; a real long while (or as the serbs like to say - you got eaten by the dark).

Anyway, disregard the above message, for you don't have enough money to afford a decent hosting plan in Serbia, it's just too expensive!

Greece? (2, Informative)

Pinckney (1098477) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195874)

Privacy International [http://www.privacyinternational.org/] ranks Greece highest among the nations they have examined in terms of the protection it provides for privacy.

Sweden? (1)

fred911 (83970) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195896)

Liberal IP and fair use laws, public notice and awareness of State side (**AA) bullying, decent bandwidth availability fair privacy laws.

Freenet! (1)

xtracto (837672) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195910)

You can not get more freedom than FreeNet [freenetproject.org] . Yeah, everybody knows netcraft has confirmed that it is dying but it is still there :)

Depends of the local laws (2, Interesting)

future assassin (639396) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195922)

You could host with someone who says they won't give out your info but you still have to deal with their server provider. If the server provider get a signed court order to give up a server most companies will be obligated to obey it.

I run a small web host in Canada that hosts Cannabis related sites. I had to ask my server provider first if they allow that kind of traffic and their said they are ok with it and will only give out info with a signed court order. Same goes for me. Unless you have a signed court order from a "Canadian" court/judge I won't give out a customer info. Once there is a court order I'm obligated to flow it since I do run a business and don't need the legal hassle. You could be the FBI/Secret Service, if you are not a Canadian authority with a legally signed court order you can take a hike.

You'll find that most businesses will do this no matter where they are unless they have deeeep pockets to pay for your legal problems.

Anonymous Webhosting (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22195946)

Hi there.

Anonymous web hosting is the answer. If you cannot be linked to the site, then you're save.

(1) Get a anonymous credit card, for example from http://card444.com/ [card444.com] - it's not cheap, but probably worth it. Don't pay it with your real credit card.

(2) Get a webhoster in some country that doesn't have too good political contacts with your nemesis, and that does allow paying by credit card (you want to use your fresh, anonymous one!). For example, http://www.shinjiru.com/ [shinjiru.com] is known to ignore abusive complaints against their hosted services in the anonymisation subculture.

Re:Anonymous Webhosting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22196002)

I forgot to mention: Whenever you access your server, use either anonymous web access, or some other relay or anonymisation service. Encrypt via SSL. Remember that financial transactions are traceable.

Hosting in another country will SCREW you (1)

Tanman (90298) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195966)

The patriot act explicitly allows the government to fuck you over with no warrent or due cause if they can trace your transactions internationally. In otherwords, by hosting internationally, your rights are forfeit.

Yes, it sucks. Yes, it's unconstitutional. But it's a lot like taking a crosswalk in front of a speeding semi: Ok, he is in the wrong. You're still dead.

Why worry? (2, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195978)

If you arent hiding anything, you have nothing to worry about.

Of course I'm joking, but good luck finding a place 100% secure, anywhere in the world.

riseup.net (3, Interesting)

Phlegethon_River (1136619) | more than 6 years ago | (#22195984)

riseup.net

From their Privacy Policy:

Please delete your user data (No contact info means that they can't be forced to give something which isn't there. Drawback: forget your password, you're screwed)
We keep minimal logs
We do not share data with anyone
We will defend your data
We will not monitor your communications
Your data is encrypted

(No, I am not affiliated with them, just found out about them this week myself)

Recent 5th Amendment ruling (1)

Rinisari (521266) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196010)

IANAL.

How would an encrypted, passworded filesystem work as a means of privacy? Granted, the server admin would need to be present at boot time (and for every reboot) either to input a password or connect some kind of storage with a key file. The latter option isn't as secure, because courts could subpoena that media. However, there was a recent court ruling (SCOTUS?) which said that a person cannot be compelled to divulge a password on the grounds that doing so would cause self-incrimination, and is unconstitutional thanks to the fifth amendment.

I believe that, in order to be admissible in court, the server's hard drive (at least) would have to be confiscated, but the information on it would be unreadable because of the encryption. Now, that's physical security.

However, the problem, then, is finding a datacenter that would host such a box and refuse to pull down the box (but wouldn't have a problem allowing the authorities to confiscate it since everything on the disk is encrypted). I suppose that the server administrator could file a counter-DMCA and then allow the servers to be confiscated. The datacenter/ISP is protected, and the server administrator is protected because the fifth amendment bars the courts from compelling him to divulge the password to the encrypted filesystem.

Am I thinking in the correct vein?

Re:Recent 5th Amendment ruling (1)

MulluskO (305219) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196180)

I think you are on the right track, but if you're considered a service provider the better tactic may be to use HTTPS and not to log anything. It might make banning people more difficult, but maybe you could (here's a neat idea) save secure hashes of IP addresses instead.

It really depends on what information you're trying to protect. Users' identities? Content of posts? Should you be on the web at all?

still under brit rule (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22196016)

i think not only did they move the 3NM line to 12NM but also germany didnt have unification till the early 90s so i wouldnt coulnt on their theory of it being an separate entity therefore becoming its own state

u wana have privacy host it on international waters

on a boat

which u with firearm stand by and hold dear to life because of daily pirates !!!
and even then .. the mexicans

saving thread (1)

jmickle (941634) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196066)

I guess everyone in the us will just save this thread so rather then not being able to get you with us jurisdiction on the server.... we just have proof of you talking about it on slashdot

Russian Business Network (1)

TurinPT (1226568) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196082)

well theres always the RBN [wikipedia.org] .
If you don't mind sharing your server with child porn that is.

traffic still passes through american servers (1)

petes_PoV (912422) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196114)

and can therefore still be tapped, subpoenaed and used in evidence. It doesn't matter where the hosts are, you need to consider where the traffic will flow on it's way to and from whereever. If it touches US territory, they'll still get you.

Consider the nordic countries (3, Informative)

SplatMan_DK (1035528) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196158)

You might want to consider the Scandinavian/Baltic region.

Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Greenland are all pretty protective about their citizens privacy. Provided your sites contain only "controversial" (but not illegal) content, you would definitely be in the clear!

Illegal content would be: child pornography, copyrighted material for which you do not have the distribution right, neo-nazi propaganda and holocausts-denial. Pretty much everything else is accepted. Including blasphemies drawings

Germany is also a good bet - but you would have to add "scientology" to the list of illegal content ;-)

- Jesper

Re:Consider the nordic countries (1)

SplatMan_DK (1035528) | more than 6 years ago | (#22196178)

...meant so write "including blasphemies and sarcastic drawings" as a reference to the recent "Mohamed cases" in Sweden and Denmark :-)

- Jesper

Image Board (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22196162)

Sound to me like he wants to host an image board but doesn't want to get party vanned.

I have considered running one myself because I think it would be fun to write the software, but I wouldn't know how to protect myself from the law if people decided to post illegal images aside from trolling the site all day and deleting offending posts.

Anonymous Coward has never been a more appropriate moniker.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...