Why won't FamilySearch allow the use of the Tor Browser?
Why won't FamilySearch allow the use of the Tor Browser?
Access Denied.
Answers
-
Just another user here so all I can do is speculate. But from what I can see, it sounds like a security issue. Putting a modified version of your question into Google gives the following AI summary:
Websites often block the Tor browser to prevent malicious activity, such as DDoS attacks, spam, or hacking attempts, which frequently originate from known Tor exit node IP addresses. Because Tor anonymizes traffic, sites cannot distinguish between harmless users and malicious actors, leading to high-security risks.
• Security & Abuse Prevention: Tor exit nodes are often associated with high volumes of automated bot traffic, fraud, or spam, causing websites to blacklist those IP addresses.• Preventing Malicious Activity: Many sites use security services like Cloudflare, which may flag Tor IPs as high-risk, resulting in constant CAPTCHAs or total blocks.
• Regional Restrictions/Censorship: In certain countries, government entities may block access to the Tor network itself, or website owners may choose to block it to comply with regional restrictions.
• Bot Protection: Websites often block anonymizing tools, including Tor, to prevent scraping, credential stuffing, or to ensure they can track users for advertising purposes.
• Regulatory Compliance: Some financial or sensitive websites (e.g., banks) may block Tor to meet security regulations requiring identification of user locations.
Apparently although using the Tor browser and network might increase your security it can severely impair the security of FamilySearch and allow all sorts of ways for malicious users to circumvent the website's terms of use including those imposed by contractual agreements with the owners of all of the historical record collections.
4 -
I agree with @Gordon Collett's excellent points.
Also, it would add yet more complexity to FS' test activities (and thus to costs) if they were to support /any/ additional browser - any potential loss of traffic would have to be more important than the clear risks Gordon articulates.
1 -
This sounds similar to the situation with VPNs - FamilySearch doesn't ban VPNs, it just makes using them seriously boring because I have to keep proving I'm a human or similar (e.g. constant CAPTCHAs as mentioned above).
It makes us think that FS feel that VPNs are a risk. But if VPNs are so dangerous for security, why do so many of the internet security companies sell their own VPN? Although the topic has been raised several times in the Community, we have never had any explanation from FS for their attitude to VPNs.
The only proposed explanation that makes any sense to me is that some data providers might wish to restrict availability of their data to certain countries. I have the distinct suspicion that I have heard of such arrangements but have seen no confirmation from FS that there are such arrangements in place or that FS is designed to allow for such arrangements in the future. I would actually have no problem with either but would prefer to be told that is the case, rather than be left wondering if the whole thing is just an accident.
Similarly, I think that an explanation of why the Tor browser is forbidden would be helpful.
Incidentally, @MandyShaw1 , I don't think allowing additional browsers should add to FS coding and testing - after all, I'll bet there are lots of Chrome or Mozilla based variant browsers accessing FS - it's just that it's at the risk of the users. There is, after all, a difference between allowing something at our risk and guaranteeing that something works.
4 -
There is this line in the Terms of Use: "This site is not intended for use in the Russian Federation and, therefore, should not be accessed within the Russian Federation." ( https://www.familysearch.org/en/legal/terms ). If I remember right, there used to be a couple more countries listed in that sentence.
I doubt that VPNs are a risk. I would think it is more what VPNs might allow. For example, last year my wife and I tried to use a VPN to watch Eurovision on NRK, Norway's broadcasting system. A screen came up that said something along the lines of "You are using a VPN. Please turn it off." When we turned off the VPN, we then got the message, "This broadcast is not available in your country."
From FamilySearch's standpoint, I think it might be an issue that a VPN might make it much harder to tell if a "user" is a person who will be plodding away through the website or an automated routine attempting to violate this sentence on the same Terms of Use page: "You further agree that, unless you have received our prior written permission, you will not use any software, technology, or device to perform a bulk download, to scrape content, or to otherwise harvest any information or materials from this site."
3 -
@Gordon Collett said, "I doubt that VPNs are a risk. I would think it is more what VPNs might allow". That's a neat way of expressing things.
3 -
informative
0
