++ 19/10/14 16:13 +0200 - Manuel Gebauer:
ii) in some legal systems this may mean you can be held responsible for the traffic that is routed via your node.
Example? In Germany you might (or might not) be responsible for traffic you relay. But not relaying part of the traffic doesn't change a thing, legally.
First: I was discussing a situation where the policy doesn't get published in the descriptor. For example, one is iptables to deny access to some IP-space. This is of course different from configuring this rejection policy in the Tor configuration file.
As for the responsinilty: I was referring to the e-Commerce directive in the EU. Article 12 says:
"Where an [...] service is provided that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information [...], Member States shall ensure that the service provider is not liable for the information transmitted, on condition that the provider [...] does not select or modify the information contained in the transmission."
I would says that if an operator rejects traffic using iptables, he does do selection of information contained in the transmission. Of course, this is different when configuring the rejection in the Tor configuration that gets published.
As far as I know, there is no case law, so results may differ.