Yes, I’m fully aware that Onion Services have many legitimate uses. I’m a Core Tor contributor and a lot of my prior work was in fact on onion services.
But considering a huge bulk of onion services is illicit content, I have wondered for years why didn’t onion services get removed despite a bad reputation? Is most of the onion service traffic actually legitimate? Why not just make Tor clearnet-only?
I understand that in the eyes of the public, Tor is the dark web and it has a bad rap. With those eyes, the dark web is all about drugs, guns, human traffic, child porn, etc etc etc.
I know that bad behaviour is what makes the news anywhere. It attracts clicks and clicks make money. No one wants to read of a good deed about helping a blind guy or old lady cross the street. Pushing one into the traffic though will certainly create headlines. This pushing is probably one in a billion. (have no stats)
I also know that many regimes block (or try to block) Tor usage so there must be stuff they do not want their people to know. I have no idea what. 
This is the good deed you never read about because it is boring.
Since you were a Core Tor contributor, maybe you have info not available to the rest of us. Is there any research about this illicit content relative to just anonymous traffic usage? it would make an interesting read.
We all know Murphy’s law. His cousin twice removed also had a law: If something can be abused, it will.
I am a Core Tor contributor but never worked for the Tor Project. I work for Microsoft and only volunteered for Tor.
I do agree the bad news is for clicks. I’m betting it’s also because media companies want to track you and Tor actually works, whereas VPNs can still be traced back as you’re using a “normal” browser with all your cookies. So they make Tor seem like all the illegal stuff in the world when it’s not.
Heck, once my former ISP CenturyLink (a.k.a Lumen) wanted to shut down my middle relay from the bad rap, but I fought back successfully. CL’s home TOS doesn’t ban Tor and they are a Tier 1 backbone carrying everyone’s traffic. It could also have been the threat of Net Neutrality coming back (even if the stupid courts blocked it for now) which makes blocking relays illegal CGNAT aside.
Hello,
I’d like to clarify any potential confusion:
“Core Contributors” refers to individuals who have gone through the Tor Project membership process, which is outlined here: Membership Policy - The Tor Project - Policies. Some of these contributors are listed on our team page: Tor Project | People.
Please note that contributing to little-t-tor does not automatically make someone a member of the Tor Core Contributors group.
Ah, thanks for clarifying.
I did want to be listed on the team page, but didn’t know how to join.
AH, your reference to CGNAT gives me an insight to my Snowflake proxy. With the exhaustion of IPV4, I figured there had to be something like CGNAT but did not know for a fact that it was implemented. It now makes me wonder about the veracity of services like maxmind and others which locate an IP by geo position.
Snowflake stats unrelated to this thread but which I realize could be part of this illicit traffic you mention:
34% of connections made to my proxy are < 31 seconds which tells me the connections are not meaningful
64% of all attempts actually make a connection
42% of all attempts make a meaningful connection
I don’t think anyone can answer that question. I know that mine is, or is by my definition of legitimate (which may not be yours). I use it as the backbone for a method to put my VPS on a personal WireGuard network through ssh because I don’t want it linked to me.
We don’t (and can’t) know how much of that goes on because it’s not publicized. People use methods like this because they don’t want to advertise their association with a machine or service, and so no one sees it. “illicit” use (and by that I mean that which is widely accepted as “illicit”) will always get more attention than licit, because illicit use is often by its nature spread so other illicit users can find it. While licit use, or legitimately hidden use, is hidden for a reason and isn’t advertised. But those are rough metrics. See below.
- If that was done today, then I’m pretty sure it would be forked tomorrow.
- Because 100% of what anyone calls illicit is only illicit to some, but more importantly…
- 100% of what you call licit and legitimate is illicit and illegitimate to someone somewhere.
The last point is the frightening thought. No matter how good and above board it is, there is someone who would censor it. And that’s not supposition, because we don’t have to look too far to find people and places that have tried to or are currently trying to.
1 Like
The ones I mention in my first post is illicit everywhere (as in not permitted : unlawful) but I get what you are saying re: 2 and 3.
One person’s traitor is someone else’s patriot.