Ok, so that problem solves the gmail problem but pretty much every spam
filter at least takes in the SORBS etc. databases as a factor. Thanks
though, I'll do that.
SORBS was mentioned in Tor-talk July 2005 at WTH as downloadable from
and no involvement with SORBS idiots is required.
If you don't like SORBS, don't use them.
TOR doesn't try to be invisible .. if a site admin wants to block
anonymous ($whatever) .. they're free to do so, and SORBS just makes it
easier (the TOR dnsbl).
Statistically speaking, the volume
Hi,
i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid confusion,
i'm stopping my TOR server before and starting after the number change.
But after the start TOR is very slow.
Is there a better way to tell the TOR server that the public IP has changed?
Greets
i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid
confusion,
i'm stopping my TOR server before and starting after the number
change.
But after the start TOR is very slow.
Is there a better way to tell the TOR server that the public IP has
changed?
Tor will detect it and
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:55:36 +0100 Tom Hek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid
confusion,
*Ten times per day?* Please tell us again why it is you're bothering
to run a tor server if you also feel you have to hide its existence.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Scott Bennett schrieb:
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:55:36 +0100 Tom Hek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid
confusion,
*Ten times per day?* Please tell us again why it is you're
Hi,
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:55:36 +0100 Tom Hek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid
confusion,
*Ten times per day?* Please tell us again why it is you're bothering
to run a tor server if you also feel you have to hide its
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 09:19:11PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:55:36 +0100 Tom Hek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
i'm changing my public IP number ten times per day and to avoid
confusion,
*Ten times per day?* Please tell us again why
Hans Schnehl wrote:
A word about obfuscation: If we run a tor node, we are as anonymous as Sta.
Claus
hiding behind sunglasses to our ISP's. If they want, they can see that we are running a router/tor-node.
Actually they can hardly miss it.
yes, they can't! At least for an exit gateway they
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 09:33:50AM -0500, Michael Holstein wrote:
and no involvement with SORBS idiots is required.
If you don't like SORBS, don't use them.
TOR doesn't try to be invisible .. if a site admin wants to block
anonymous ($whatever) .. they're free to do so, and SORBS just
Hi,
A word about obfuscation: If we run a tor node, we are as anonymous as Sta.
Claus
hiding behind sunglasses to our ISP's.
that's clear; i'm using TOR as a mix with a transparent local http proxy which
uses an ISP
proxy as parent proxy, so that the exit traffic goes through two proxies
On Jan 7, 2008 4:52 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
that's clear; i'm using TOR as a mix with a transparent local http proxy
which uses an ISP
proxy as parent proxy, so that the exit traffic goes through two proxies and
with several numbers
in the X_FORWARDED_FOR header ;-)
That's good
Folks,
I run a tor relay node (no exits) on my school's network. Due to their
bandwidth policy, I have to limit traffic to about 1 Gb per day. Weak,
I know.
HOWEVER, my school is also connected to the Abilene/Internet2 backbone,
and they DON'T limit bandwidth usage over Internet2!
Hi,
If this or things like it continue people who see a need to block (or
otherwise treat differently) users from TOR will simply run probing
hosts across the tor network, wasting TOR bandwidth, and applying
their tor blocks to big proxy servers.
that would be useless because i do change
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 10:52:57PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
A word about obfuscation: If we run a tor node, we are as anonymous as Sta.
Claus
hiding behind sunglasses to our ISP's.
that's clear; i'm using TOR as a mix with a transparent local http proxy
which uses an ISP
Changing the IPs has the added benefit of helping users behind firewalls
that block tor.
Comrade Ringo Kamens
On Jan 7, 2008 5:26 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
If this or things like it continue people who see a need to block (or
otherwise treat differently) users from TOR will simply
Nick Mathewson wrote:
On the other hand, if your only goal is to block anonymous SMTP, and
you agree that blocking all Tor servers is very overreaching, you
might instead try looking at the more targetted DNSEL service
available at
http://exitlist.torproject.org/
It lets you block _exactly_
Nick Mathewson schrieb:
It's your server. But the last time I looked, the SORBS Tor list
tried to include _all_ Tor servers, not just the ones that are
configured to relay SMTP.
Not all Tor servers are listed in SORBS. I believe, the listing in
SORBS depends not on SMTP exit rules. The listed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Olaf Selke wrote:
| Hans Schnehl wrote:
(snip)
| yes, they can't! At least for an exit gateway they receive
| potentially tons of abuse complaints.
Very true. This is one reason why I suggest only organizations (as
opposed to residential users) -
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(snip)
| i got only a snail mail with a complaint about much spam, because i
started with no closed port.
| Since i closed port 25 i had no complaint since more than a year :-)
| And with the proxy chaining of port 80 it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
TOR-Admin (gpfTOR1) wrote:
(snip)
| I changed the ExitPolicity of my node and it was delisted half a year
| ago. The ports 465 and 587 were open since Dez. 2007 and SORBS did
| not list my server again.
So it *is* selective, and not carte
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Nathaniel Fairfield wrote:
| Folks,
|
| I run a tor relay node (no exits) on my school's network. Due to their
| bandwidth policy, I have to limit traffic to about 1 Gb per day. Weak,
| I know.
Weak? Not really. I'm sure home users don't
22 matches
Mail list logo
