Enforced community standards for research on users of the Tor anonymity network

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 7126 LNCS, Issue , 2012, Pages 146-153

  Soghoian, Christopher ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANONYMITY NETWORKS; COMMUNITY STANDARDS; DATA GATHERING; LEGAL ISSUES; NETWORK COMMUNICATIONS; PROGRAM COMMITTEE; SECURITY AND PRIVACY;

CRYPTOGRAPHY; RESEARCH;

NETWORK SECURITY;

EID: 84861428495     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-29889-9_13     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. Allman, M.: What ought a program committee to do? In: Proceedings of the Conference on Organizing Workshops, Conferences, and Symposia for Computer Systems, pp. 9:1-9:5. USENIX Association, Berkeley (2008)
2. Burstein, A.J.: Conducting cybersecurity research legally and ethically. In: Proceedings of the 1st Usenix Workshop on Large-Scale Exploits and Emergent Threats, pp. 8:1-8:8. USENIX Association, Berkeley (2008)
3. Castelluccia, C., De Cristofaro, E., Perito, D.: Private Information Disclosure from Web Searches. In: Atallah, M.J., Hopper, N.J. (eds.) PETS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6205, pp. 38-55. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
4. Dingledine, R., Mathewson, N., Syverson, P.: Tor: the second-generation onion router. In: Proceedings of the 13th conference on USENIX Security Symposium, SSYM 2004, vol. 13, p. 21. USENIX Association, Berkeley (2004)
5. Dittrich, D., Bailey, M., Dietrich, S.: Have we Crossed the Line? The Growing Ethical Debate in Modern Computer Security Research. In: (Poster at) Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Computer and Communication Security (CCS 2009), Chicago, Illinois, USA (November 2009)
6. Dittrich, D., Bailey, M., Dietrich, S.: Towards community standards for ethical behavior in computer security research. Technical Report 2009-01, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ, USA (April 2009)
7. Garfinkel, S.L.: Irbs and security research: myths, facts and mission creep. In: Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Usability, Psychology, and Security, pp. 13:1-13:5. USENIX Association, Berkeley (2008)
8. Landwehr, C.E.: Drawing the line. IEEE Security and Privacy 8, 3-4 (2010)
9. Loesing, K., Murdoch, S.J., Dingledine, R.: A Case Study on Measuring Statistical Data in the Tor Anonymity Network. In: Sion, R., Curtmola, R., Dietrich, S., Kiayias, A., Miret, J.M., Sako, K., Seb'e, F. (eds.) RLCPS, WECSR, and WLC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6054, pp. 203-215. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
10. McCoy, D., Bauer, K., Grunwald, D., Kohno, T., Sicker, D.: Response to tor study (July 25, 2008), http://www.verisign.com/static/039933.pdf
11. McCoy, D., Bauer, K., Grunwald, D., Kohno, T., Sicker, D.C.: Shining Light in Dark Places: Understanding the Tor Network. In: Borisov, N., Goldberg, I. (eds.) PETS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5134, pp. 63-76. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
12. Sicker, D.C., Ohm, P., Grunwald, D.: Legal issues surrounding monitoring during network research. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement, IMC 2007, pp. 141-148. ACM, New York (2007)
13. Soghoian, C.: Legal Risks For Phishing Researchers. In: Proceedings of eCrime Researchers Summit (2008)
14. Soghoian, C.: Researchers could face legal risks for network snooping. Surveilance State (July 24, 2008), news.cnet.com/8301-13739-3-9997273-46.html