Discuss mailing list

[Brian Koontz <brian AT pongonova.net>]

On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 02:17:40PM +0000, Bogart DeJoint wrote:
> when did opennic take on the role of providing dns to sites of 
> questionable legal status? in my view, hosting these things on specific 
> servers which easily identify the individuals involved is generally a 
> bad idea. if you don't associate opennic with this sort of activity, you 
> won't need legal protection because no one will have a case against any 
> of the operators.

OpenNIC isn't intended to be "anonymous" in the sense that its servers
are hidden away behind layers of proxies.  There is probably a need
for this, but OpenNIC isn't the organization to carry this out.

Having been at the receiving end of a federal law enforcement query
regarding my servers, and I can tell you that (1) they are watching,
(2) they know we anonymize logs, (3) they also know exactly what we
do.  If this bothers you, then you probably shouldn't be running a
(public) server. 

This is why it's so important that OpenNIC not be perceived as
"hosting" any sort of content not associated with the actual workings
of the organization.  

  --Brian