Yeah versus that contract free optical line you have. Even if you use techniques like hosting on hacked / open WiFi the signal can be traced back to your physical machine pretty quickly if you are using a static location particurl, arly as would be the most likely scenario with a server. Your entire argument against data centers here is retarded. You can send in your own hardware to most data centers, if you pay to rent rack space and bandwidth. This has its own risks in the forensics and traceability departments, but it does give a few advantages primarily you don't need to trust a pre-installed configuration from the data center and you can use fancy hardware security systems / techniques, for exampe chasis intrusion detection / memory encapsulation systems. You can also get the advantage of not using a data center installed OS if you buy a server with a KVM switch, this gives remote access to the boot sequence, bios and allows you to install an OS remotely as well, although I am not certain I think it is still not as secure from data center positioned attackers who want to root kit you as sending in your own server is. However sending in your own server has too many other risks imo and isn't worth tamper resistance since most of the benefits you would get by having a tamper resistant case can be gained by using asymmetric encryption systems anyway. Anyway you are either an agent or one of the dime a dozen retards who argues incorrect bullshit and refuses to believe documented evidence when proven wrong. I still have trouble to differentiate between people who are mentally retarded and federal agents, I think it might be because of the large degree of overlap though.