+1 on this as I've recently started running an obfs4 bridge for similar
reasons as Prof. Hoffmann. Although arm seems to indicate I get very little
traffic through it (avg 50Kb/sec).
On 28 January 2017 at 09:16, Sebastian Hoffmann wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've been running a relay for several months n
I know some people using this for applying kernel updates without
rebooting, but don't know how good it is:
https://www.cloudlinux.com/all-products/product-overview/kernelcare
On 23 October 2016 at 09:16, nusenu wrote:
> > Second, you will reduce the uptime and stability of
> > your relay, th
I think this issue has been discussed here before.
The general opinion on the list is that it's not a good idea to run an exit
at home. It's probably not worth the hassle.
On 31 July 2016 at 14:13, Stig Atle Steffensen
wrote:
> I never thought I would be one of those operators who had to deal
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Gareth Llewellyn
> *Sent:* 12 June 2016 18:38
> *To:* tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> *Subject:* Re: [tor-relays] Filter Tor Exit
A while ago I had a lengthy dicussion with my ISP about this. They wanted
me to run Snort on my exit to shut off variuos types of traffic coming from
it. In the end I agreed only to allow encrypted protocols to exit, which
placated them (and a subsequent bandwith limitation booted me out of the
exi
...@networksaremadeofstring.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Jonathan Baker-Bates <
> jonat...@bakerbates.com> wrote:
>
>> So does anyone know of any reliable source of information on running Tor
>> exits in the UK?
>>
>
> No but I run severa
ourself, and you just send them the big template to
> stop them.
>
> When I briefly ran one on my ISP network, we got no letters
> complaining (I'm with British Telecom/BT), and they can't make you do
> anything, remember this.
> - --Billy
>
> On 08/09/2015 21:04, J
I run an exit node with an ISP who initially indicated they would not have
a problem with Tor as long as I was transparent about what I was doing, and
ran a sufficiently reduced exit policy.
They have now sent me evidence of malicious traffic coming from the exit. I
don't think they've had any 3rd
Thanks all for the advice - I'll have a think about the options. Am
inclined just to leave it as is for now, but tempted by the 2nd instance
idea too.
Jonathan
On 17 July 2015 at 17:21, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 14:52:42 +0100
> Jonathan Baker-Bates wrote:
&
I've been running an exit node for a number of years without incident, so I
tend not to look at its state very much. I'm also not very technically
knowledgeable about Tor.
However, I notice from Atlas that from January 1st, the exit probability of
my server dropped dramatically and has stayed that
> I guess my concern was based on [unfounded?] paranoia over possible isp
reprisals?
The way I see it, having my IP (and indeed email address and PGP
fingerprint) on my relay info helps *prevent* ISP reprisals since it's full
disclosure. That may be naive on my part, but after about 6 years of
run
I should point out that the complaint wasn't sent to me directly, but
somebody I know saw it on a usenet group and forwarded it, asking whether
the Tor community was aware of it.
So as Roger points out, it's not a "routine" complaint, and in fact the
complainant appears to know about and understan
On 24 February 2013 22:43, Moritz Bartl wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> Yes, we did receive a similar request some time ago. We are not going to
> block whole Google Groups because of single/rare incidents.
>
>
OK thanks Moritz - I'll ignore that then.
Jonathan
Hi All,
I've been forwarded a request to block Google Groups IPs due to some abuse
or various usenet groups.
Is anyone else rejecting from these IPs, and should I do the same?
Thanks,
Jonathan
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.or
14 matches
Mail list logo
