[varenc]

Your mixing up general Tor use vs Tor hidden services. With hidden services there’s not really an exit node because the traffic never exits the Tor network.

Charlie could only see the machine in the final step of requesting the illegal content it Charlie was hosting the hidden service themselves. These requests can come from many different Tor operators not just exit nodes.

[Manuel_D]

To be clear, Bob is not the host of the illegal content. Bob is just the second-to-last hop before the content reaches the end destination (Charlie). My understanding of the tor network is that it obfuscates traffic across many hops. The path content takes from the host to Charlie:

Host -> Node 1 -> Node 2 -> ... Bob -> Charlie

this obfuscates the Host from Charlie. But Charlie knows that Bob sent him illegal content. Yes, Bob didn't host the content. The host is obfuscated. But Bob is still delivering illegal content and Charlie knows it.

[aniviacat]

Exit nodes are not the nodes that are directly facing tor users. Those nodes are called "Guard Relays".

Guard Relays usually don't have these issues, since you have to be somewhat technical to actively probe relays by requesting content through tor. And technical people know there isn't any point to rading an operator's home.

[fn-mote]

> Bob is still delivering illegal content and Charlie knows it

Does BOB know they are delivering illegal content?

No... is it even possible to send unencrypted traffic by Tor? If it's even possible, Charlie must be the only person in the world doing it.

[Manuel_D]

> Does BOB know they are delivering illegal content?

He does when Charlie knocks on his door and informs him that he delivered CSE to him. Ignorance of the fact that one is breaking the law is rarely accepted as a defense. Carriers usually get this protection when when meet some standards of safeguards and cooperation with law enforcement.

[Zak]

Ignorance of the law is not generally accepted as a legal defense, but ignorance of facts is. Most crimes involve a mental state of knowledge or intent with respect to the wrongdoing, and an exit node operator does not know what users are accessing.

Taking the wrong jacket by mistake is not theft, and operating the exit node through which someone downloads CSAM is not criminal possession of CSAM or knowing facilitation thereof.

[Manuel_D]

Do you think drug mules get off scot-free when they say "I didn't know what was in that package"?

[Zak]

If the prosecutor can't convince the jury that they did know, yes.

That rarely happens in practice because prosecutors are usually pretty good at their jobs, and tend not to bring cases they can't prove.