Editing Anonymous P2P (section)

==Arguments for and against anonymous P2P communication==

===General===
While anonymous P2P systems may support the protection of unpopular speech, they may also protect illegal activities, such as [[fraud]], [[slander and libel|libel]], the exchange of illegal [[pornography]], the unauthorized copying of [[copyright]]ed works, or the planning of criminal activities. Critics of anonymous P2P systems hold that these disadvantages outweigh the advantages offered by such systems, and that other communication channels are already sufficient for unpopular speech.

Proponents of anonymous P2P systems believe that all restrictions on free speech serve authoritarian interests, information itself is ethically neutral, and that it is the people acting upon the information that can be good or evil. Perceptions of good and evil can also change (see [[moral panic]]); for example, if anonymous peer-to-peer networks had existed in the 1950s or 1960s, they might have been targeted for carrying information about [[civil rights]] or [[anarchism]].

Easily accessible anonymous P2P networks are seen by some as a democratization of [[encryption]] technology, giving the general populace access to secure communications channels already used by governments. Supporters of this view, such as [[Phil Zimmermann]], argue that anti-surveillance technologies help to equalize power between governments and their people,<ref name="Zimmermann_interview">Russell D. Hoffmann (1996). [http://www.animatedsoftware.com/hightech/philspgp.htm Interview with author of PGP (Pretty Good Privacy)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190416085355/http://www.animatedsoftware.com/hightech/philspgp.htm |date=2019-04-16 }}. Transcript of a radio interview, retrieved 2008-01-21.</ref> which is the actual reason for banning them. [[John Pilger]] opines that  monitoring of the populace helps to contain threats to the "consensual view of established authority"<ref name="pilger">John Pilger (2002). [http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/11340 Impartiality of British Journalism]{{dead link|date=October 2016 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}. ZNet article, retrieved 2008-02-11.</ref> or threats to the continuity of power structures and privilege.

===Freedom of speech===
Some claim that true [[freedom of speech]], especially on controversial subjects, is difficult or impossible unless individuals can speak anonymously. If anonymity is not possible, one could be subjected to threats or reprisals for voicing an unpopular view. This is one reason why voting is done by secret [[ballot]] in many democracies. Controversial information which a party wants to keep hidden, such as details about corruption issues, is often published or leaked anonymously.

====Anonymous blogging====
{{main|Anonymous blogging}}
[[Anonymous blogging]] is one widespread use of anonymous networks. While anonymous blogging is possible on the non-anonymous internet to some degree too, a provider hosting the blog in question might be forced to disclose the blogger's [[IP address]] (as when Google revealed an anonymous blogger's identity<ref>Declan McCullagh (2007). [https://archive.today/20121208200015/http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9824638-38.html Google: We had no choice in Israel ID request]. CNET News.com article, retrieved 2008-02-11.</ref>). Anonymous networks provide a better degree of anonymity. Flogs (anonymous blogs) in Freenet, [[Syndie]] and other blogging tools in [[I2P]] and [[Osiris (Serverless Portal System)|Osiris sps]] are some examples of anonymous blogging technologies.

One argument for anonymous blogging is a delicate nature of work situation. Sometimes a blogger writing under their real name faces a choice between either staying silent or causing a harm to themselves, their colleagues or the company they work for.<ref>Bill Vallicella (2004). [http://maverickphilosopher.blogspot.com/2004/07/reasons-for-anonyblogging.html Reasons for 'Anonyblogging'] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060514095855/http://maverickphilosopher.blogspot.com/2004/07/reasons-for-anonyblogging.html |date=2006-05-14 }}. Maverick Philosopher blog, retrieved 2008-02-11.</ref>

Another reason is risk of lawsuits. Some bloggers have faced multimillion-dollar lawsuits<ref>Media Bloggers Association (2006). [https://web.archive.org/web/20070630182947/http://www.mediabloggers.org/mba-news/mba-member-hit-with-multi-million-dollar-federal-lawsuit MBA Member Hit With Multi-Million Dollar Federal Lawsuit]. Retrieved 2008-02-11.</ref> (although they were later dropped completely<ref>Associated Press (2006). [http://www.boston.com/news/local/maine/articles/2006/05/06/ad_agency_drops_lawsuit_against_maine_blogger/ Ad agency drops lawsuit against Maine blogger]. Retrieved 2008-02-11.</ref>); anonymous blogging provides protection against such risks.

====Censorship via Internet domain names====
On the non-anonymous Internet, a [[domain name]] like "[[example.com]]" is a key to accessing information. The censorship of the Wikileaks website shows that domain names are extremely vulnerable to censorship.{{Citation needed|date=June 2023}} Some domain registrars have suspended customers' domain names even in the absence of a court order.{{Citation needed|date=June 2023}}

For the affected customer, blocking of a domain name is a far bigger problem than a registrar refusing to provide a service; typically, the registrar keeps full control of the domain names in question. In the case of a European travel agency, more than 80 .com websites were shut down without any court process and held by the registrar since then. The travel agency had to rebuild the sites under the .net [[top-level domain]] instead.<ref>Adam Liptak (2008). [https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/04/us/04bar.html A Wave of the Watch List, and Speech Disappears] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170407043030/http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/04/us/04bar.html |date=2017-04-07 }}. ''The New York Times'', 2008-03-04. Retrieved 2008-03-09.</ref>

On the other hand, anonymous networks do not rely on [[domain name registrar]]s. For example, Freenet, [[I2P]] and Tor hidden services implement censorship-resistant URLs based on [[public-key cryptography]]: only a person having the correct private key can update the URL or take it down.

===Control over online tracking===
Anonymous P2P also has value in normal daily communication. When communication is anonymous, the decision to reveal the identities of the communicating parties is left up to the parties involved and is not available to a third party. Often there is no need or desire by the communicating parties to reveal their identities. As a matter of personal freedom, many people do not want processes in place by default which supply unnecessary data. In some cases, such data could be compiled into histories of their activities.

For example, most current phone systems transmit caller ID information by default to the called party (although this can be disabled either for a single call or for all calls). If a person calls to make an inquiry about a product or the time of a movie, the party called has a record of the calling phone number, and may be able to obtain the name, address and other information about the caller. This information is not available about someone who walks into a store and makes a similar inquiry.

===Effects of surveillance on lawful activity===
Online surveillance, such as recording and retaining details of web and e-mail traffic, may have effects on lawful activities.<ref name="chilling">Dawinder S. Sidhu (2007). [https://ssrn.com/abstract=1002145 The chilling effect of government surveillance programs on the use of the internet by Muslim-Americans] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220205032803/https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1002145 |date=2022-02-05 }}. University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class.</ref> People may be deterred from accessing or communicating legal information because they know of possible surveillance and believe that such communication may be seen as suspicious. According to law professor [[Daniel J. Solove]], such effects "harm society because, among other things, they reduce the range of viewpoints being expressed and the degree of freedom with which to engage in political activity."<ref name="solove1">Daniel J. Solove (2006). [https://ssrn.com/abstract=998565 "I've got nothing to hide" and other misunderstandings of privacy] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220205032806/https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565 |date=2022-02-05 }}. San Diego Law Review, Vol. 44.</ref>

===Access to censored and copyrighted material===
Most countries ban or censor the publication of certain [[List of books banned by governments|books]] and [[Banned films|movies]], and certain types of content. Other material is legal to possess but not to distribute; for example, copyright and [[software patent]] laws may forbid its distribution. These laws are difficult or impossible to enforce in anonymous P2P networks.

===Anonymous online money===
With [[anonymous money]], it becomes possible to arrange anonymous markets where one can buy and sell just about anything anonymously. Anonymous money could be used to avoid [[tax]] collection. However, any transfer of physical goods between two parties could compromise anonymity.<ref name="cymru">Rob Thomas, Jerry Martin (2006). [http://www.usenix.org/publications/login/2006-12/openpdfs/cymru.pdf The underground economy: priceless] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080511154350/http://www.usenix.org/publications/login/2006-12/openpdfs/cymru.pdf |date=2008-05-11 }}. Retrieved 2008-01-20.</ref>

Proponents argue that conventional [[cash]] provides a similar kind of anonymity, and that existing laws are adequate to combat crimes like [[tax evasion]] that might result from the use of anonymous cash, whether online or offline.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Technology and Privacy Policy|url=https://www.ntia.gov/page/chapter-5-technology-and-privacy-policy|access-date=2020-11-07|archive-date=2022-02-05|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220205032759/https://www.ntia.gov/page/chapter-5-technology-and-privacy-policy|url-status=live}}</ref>