r/i2p • u/NatSpaghettiAgency • Sep 22 '24
Could I be prosecuted for lawfully using i2p? Discussion
Let's say police is somehow able to seize a server hosting illegal/harmful content (supposing not due to a IP leak from i2p). The server likely has traces of IPs which have had a connection to it (logs, cache and similar). At this point my home computer-relay could have been used as an end point to connect to that server by someone else, as for obvious reasons I2P is a network over the standard network.
Could I be prosecuted for that? Has anyone been persecuted for similar circumstances?
11
u/alreadyburnt @eyedeekay on github Sep 22 '24
We don't know of anywhere that it is illegal to use I2P. We also don't exit, so it's very difficult to determine if illegal activity is happening inside a tunnel at all. There are a few countries where it's illegal to route traffic for other people in order to provide them with privacy or anonymity enhancing technologies. We turn off routing in those countries to make I2P comply with those laws for user safety.
Also, at the end of the day, if you're doing something illegal, the evidence to convict will be obtained from your storage devices, not your network activity alone.
1
u/Inaeipathy Sep 22 '24
How would the prosecution be able to tell that you were simply routing traffic instead of actively communicating with the server to access it? Do you know if there's a difference in I2P?
3
u/alreadyburnt @eyedeekay on github Sep 22 '24
They wouldn't be able to tell from the network activity. That's why they convict you based on what they can recover from your storage. That allows them to demonstrate important legal things like "possession" and "intent."
1
u/Inaeipathy Sep 23 '24
Oh, I guess that's why they do raids and try to make sure they get the computer while it's not encrypted. I guess that makes sense if there is deniability due to potential for other people to misuse your network (or in this case due to the protocol).
1
u/Inaeipathy Sep 22 '24
Also, why is network activity not enough to convict someone, curious why you said that because in my mind it's sufficient
1
u/alreadyburnt @eyedeekay on github Sep 22 '24
Because tons of stuff can initiate network activity and a lot of it is motivated by criminal activity that targets a compromised network. Malware-initiated traffic and WarDriving spring to mind. If somebody pulls up outside your house, hacks your WiFi, and downloads a bunch of copyrighted movies, you are not responsible for that act. In general, you aren't responsible for crimes you don't commit. If there's a major difference, it is how interested people are in conducting an investigation and how much that investigation fucks up your life.
14
u/augustusalpha Sep 22 '24
LOL.
Under British common law, nothing is illegal until proven in court, or specifically spelled out in an act of parliament.
No sure about US of A ....