Hi, > The problem is that it does not scale 1:1. > > If you set aside the biggest problems: > - Users with firewalls/NAT routers and lack of knowhow to set them up > correctly.
If they can use Tor to surf they should be able to let the Tor server component also access it. Same program. Don't understand this arguement. > - Increased use increases incentives for the bad guys, _especially_ if > a vulnerability is discovered. Everyone would be vulnerable. What is the point. The same thing right now. If a vulnerability is discovered then people must update immediately. Who says that all people running Tor servers right now are computer whizzes? > The reason it does not scale 1:1 is that (in EU at least), > Internet-access to the users are provided mostly asymmetrically. My > new connection has an awesome 20Mbit downstream, and the whole of > 1Mbit upstream. Even with the fastest (consumer) subscription I'm not > able to host a TOR server if I'm also going to use other services > (VoIP, etc.). Yes, but if everybody gets the download speed that he provides for upload then it scales perfectly. In your case 1M. > And I wouldn't approve of the whole forcing-people either, at least by > my own moral standards, especially not in a freedom-project like this! Where is the force. That would just be the way the program works! Same thing with emule, freenet, etc, etc. Give and take. No harm done. I wasn't saying that everybody should become an exit node. JT -- JT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Faster than the air-speed velocity of an unladen european swallow
