On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 04:13:00PM -0800, Nelson wrote:
> I do believe there is a benefit to Torrents as many of us can attest to,
> ex: fast downloads of different Linux distros; but if your use of
> Torrents is in fact legit then why use Tor for downloading your legal
> content in the first plac
Er, the quoting on my last post was incorrect, it should look like this:
> Kevin C. Krinke:
>
> >> On Nov 4, 2013, at 7:13 PM, Nelson
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> I do believe there is a benefit to Torrents as many of us can
> >> attest to, ex: fast downloads of different Linux distros; but if
> >
Kevin C. Krinke:
>> On Nov 4, 2013, at 7:13 PM, Nelson
>> wrote:
>>
>> I do believe there is a benefit to Torrents as many of us can
>> attest to, ex: fast downloads of different Linux distros; but if
>> your use of Torrents is in fact legit then why use Tor for
>> downloading your legal con
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
gq:
> Access to tails does not depend on any specific transfer protocol
> such as torrents correct?
>
> Could it not be made available on a hidden service, a website. an
> email or ftp server within tor?
An http hidden service with the .onion link
Access to tails does not depend on any specific transfer protocol such
as torrents correct?
Could it not be made available on a hidden service, a website. an email
or ftp server within tor?
On 11/4/2013 11:45 PM, Nelson wrote:
From all that I have read in these lists not all exit nodes
Gonna throw this out there. I've seen it written ealier that in certain
jurisdictions Tor operators are protected under the DMCA by being
classed as a "common carrier", same as ISPs. Is that correct?
If so, well ISPs rate limit or QoS certain types of traffic all the time,
usually at peak tim
>From all that I have read in these lists not all exit nodes are
configured exactly the same, so some level of traffic control is being
rightly exercised by the operator(s). For any given reason be it moral,
ethical or legal many well known ports are being blocked, as was
previously discussed, as a
> On Nov 4, 2013, at 7:13 PM, Nelson wrote:
>
> I do believe there is a benefit to Torrents as many of us can attest to,
> ex: fast downloads of different Linux distros; but if your use of
> Torrents is in fact legit then why use Tor for downloading your legal
> content in the first place? This
My main concern, and the reason I asked about blocking specific traffic
(ip's from blacklisted p2p sites), is mainly due to the problem the
original poster faces with DMCA; abuse complaints and the possibility of
being shutdown. No one wants to volunteer a service and then face legal
issues. Who in
On Sat, 02 Nov 2013 21:58:57 +, Paritesh Boyeyoko
wrote:
> On Friday 01 Nov 2013 14:39:28 Gordon Morehouse wrote:
>
> > Completely aside from the ethical and censorship-related buzzsaw you're
> > about to run into for posting this (perennial) question, I believe some
> > actual developers o
On Mon, 4 Nov 2013 14:38:40 -0500, Paul Syverson
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 08:18:29AM -0800, Gordon Morehouse wrote:
> [snip]
> > >
> > > That's just plain silly.
> >
> > Not as silly as you think, but the outright blocking vs finding ways
> > to throttle is more a discussion worth havi
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 08:18:29AM -0800, Gordon Morehouse wrote:
[snip]
> >
> > That's just plain silly.
>
> Not as silly as you think, but the outright blocking vs finding ways
> to throttle is more a discussion worth having. I suspect most of the
> Silent Majority(tm), if polled, would rather
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Lukas Erlacher:
> Let me chime in here in regards to torrents to be perhaps not the
> devil's, but the radical's advocate.
A lot of the people wishing to handle bittorrent are aware of these
arguments and may not wish to block it so much as throttl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Lukas Erlacher:
>> your refusal to pay for content people create.
>
> That's a silly smear.
If an endless tsunami of torrent traffic makes it so Tor users can't
buy music off bandcamp - a site where the artist gets the lion's
share, and where some
On Thursday 31 October 2013 19:14:47 Andy Isaacson wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 09:52:41PM -0400, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 06:12:47PM -0700, Andy Isaacson wrote:
> > > That's correct, it takes a deliberate action on the part of the
> > > administrator to become a rela
On Sunday 03 Nov 2013 23:50:58 Lukas Erlacher wrote:
> Censor torrents because your provider will shut you down if you
> generate DMCA complaints and C&D's; censor them because you truly
> believe that the torrents are a necessary sacrifice to allow the Tor
> network to continue to function; don't
> your refusal to pay for content people create.
That's a silly smear.
> not related to tor
That's just plain silly.
Did you really enter this thread just to flame? That's also silly.
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https:/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I don't think this is the right place for you to try and justify your refusal
to pay for content people create. I think most people on this list would prefer
you keep political opinions not related to tor off list.
Cheers
Ramo
On Sun, Nov 03, 2013
Let me chime in here in regards to torrents to be perhaps not the
devil's, but the radical's advocate.
I'm sure everyone here will agree that a good case can be made that
copyright laws as they stand today are a perversion of, and
counter-productive to, their original stated intention of "advancem
On 11/03/2013 at 6:51 AM, Moritz Bartl wrote:
> Where did you copy that policy from?
It is the default policy that was installed with Vidalia.
> A more conservative approach would be whitelisting, ie. Only
> allow specific ports while blocking all others. The "reduced
> exit policy" is such a whi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Paritesh Boyeyoko:
> On Friday 01 Nov 2013 14:39:28 Gordon Morehouse wrote:
>
>> Completely aside from the ethical and censorship-related buzzsaw
>> you're about to run into for posting this (perennial) question, I
>> believe some actual developers
On Saturday 02 Nov 2013 22:30:00 t...@tafb.xxx wrote:
> I'm new to running a relay. There are lots of exit policies when I look at
> my atlas details:
> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/DDB401F4CA108C6F6AF4E0DCE2DFC3407F577
> B21
>
> Is this a pretty good exit policy list to prevent harassmen
On 11/03/2013 03:30 AM, t...@tafb.xxx wrote:
> I'm new to running a relay. There are lots of exit policies when I
> look at my atlas details:
>
https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/DDB401F4CA108C6F6AF4E0DCE2DFC3407F577B21
> Is this a pretty good exit policy list to prevent harassment from my ISP?
I'm new to running a relay. There are lots of exit policies when I look at my
atlas details:
https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/DDB401F4CA108C6F6AF4E0DCE2DFC3407F577B21
Is this a pretty good exit policy list to prevent harassment from my ISP?
Thanks!
-Jamie M.
> Putting the extensive exit
Putting the extensive exit restriction policy in the responses to take-down
demands seems like a good idea.
Robert
> Publication of sample exit policies? Would that encourage exit node
> operators
> to run restricted exit policies, and save themselves loads of bandwidth
> and
> DMCA headache?
On Friday 01 Nov 2013 14:39:28 Gordon Morehouse wrote:
> Completely aside from the ethical and censorship-related buzzsaw you're
> about to run into for posting this (perennial) question, I believe some
> actual developers on Tor have written a paper about the problems with
> Bittorrent et al (and
On Saturday 02 Nov 2013 17:10:50 Moritz Bartl wrote:
> As one of the large operators that indeed allows exiting on all ports
> except 25: This is on purpose. I don't consider applications that choose
> random ports as bad, I don't consider file sharing per se as bad. I
> don't want to interfere wi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Paritesh Boyeyoko:
> On Friday 01 Nov 2013 20:02:29 Gordon Morehouse wrote:
>
>>
>> What if someone inside a totalitarian state is attempting to
>> upload evidence of a massacre to a service which runs on port
>> 80?
>
> Yeah, I did think of this
On 11/02/2013 02:46 PM, Paritesh Boyeyoko wrote:
> I'm just finding it difficult to accept that there's little to be done. As
> far
> as I can see, the only way BitTorrent content distibution can work across Tor
> is because exits are allowing accept *:* as their exit policy - torrent
> client
On Saturday 02 Nov 2013 13:21:39 Moritz Bartl wrote:
> On 11/02/2013 01:15 PM, Paritesh Boyeyoko wrote:
> > Publication of sample exit policies? Would that encourage exit node
> > operators to run restricted exit policies, and save themselves loads of
> > bandwidth and DMCA headache?
> > Is there
On 11/02/2013 01:15 PM, Paritesh Boyeyoko wrote:
> Publication of sample exit policies? Would that encourage exit node
> operators
> to run restricted exit policies, and save themselves loads of bandwidth and
> DMCA headache?
> Is there a forum where one can put up a sticky post with sample exi
On Friday 01 Nov 2013 20:02:29 Gordon Morehouse wrote:
>
> What if someone inside a totalitarian state is attempting to upload
> evidence of a massacre to a service which runs on port 80?
Yeah, I did think of this but I thought I'd put it out there anyway.
Unfortunately, too many sites/services
Paritesh Boyeyoko:
> > On the other hand, i had a reduced exit policy and still got DMCA
> > complaints just for the .torrent file being downloaded via HTTP through
> > my exit.
>
> Let me run a couple ideas past you:
>
> 1. Configure Squid as a forward proxy with Squidguard and configure
> Squ
On Friday 01 Nov 2013 20:57:54 Ted Smith wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-11-02 at 01:27 +0100, Lunar wrote:
> > Nelson:
> > > Please excuse my ignorance operating Tor relays, but if I run an exit
> > > node on Windows 7 and use something like Peerblock and correspoding
> > > block lists of P2P sites, wouldn'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Paritesh Boyeyoko:
> On Friday 01 Nov 2013 19:36:11 krishna e bera wrote:
>> On the other hand, i had a reduced exit policy and still got
>> DMCA complaints just for the .torrent file being downloaded via
>> HTTP through my exit.
>
> Let me run a co
On Sat, 2013-11-02 at 01:27 +0100, Lunar wrote:
> Nelson:
> > Please excuse my ignorance operating Tor relays, but if I run an exit
> > node on Windows 7 and use something like Peerblock and correspoding
> > block lists of P2P sites, wouldn't this be somewhat effective in
> > stopping this sort of
On Friday 01 Nov 2013 19:36:11 krishna e bera wrote:
> Isnt that about the same percentage on the non-Tor internet?
Probably. :)
> It would help if most bittorrent trackers enforced sharing ratios of
> around 1:1 (since Tor clients cannot accept incoming connections, unless
> on a .onion HS).
P
Nelson:
> Please excuse my ignorance operating Tor relays, but if I run an exit
> node on Windows 7 and use something like Peerblock and correspoding
> block lists of P2P sites, wouldn't this be somewhat effective in
> stopping this sort of undesired traffic on Tor?
No. If the relay says it will d
On Friday 01 Nov 2013 11:22:19 Nelson wrote:
> Please excuse my ignorance operating Tor relays, but if I run an exit
> node on Windows 7 and use something like Peerblock and correspoding
> block lists of P2P sites, wouldn't this be somewhat effective in
> stopping this sort of undesired traffic on
On 13-11-01 01:48 PM, Paritesh Boyeyoko wrote:
> On Friday 01 Nov 2013 05:37:14 I wrote:
> The paper http://planete.inrialpes.fr/papers/TorTraffic-NSS10.pdf shows
> 54.48%
> of the traffic passing through the sample exit nodes was BiTorrent traffic.
Isnt that about the same percentage on the non
On Fri, 01 Nov 2013 11:22:19 -0700, Nelson wrote:
> Please excuse my ignorance operating Tor relays, but if I run an exit
> node on Windows 7 and use something like Peerblock and correspoding
> block lists of P2P sites, wouldn't this be somewhat effective in
> stopping this sort of undesired traf
On Fri, 01 Nov 2013 17:48:44 +, Paritesh Boyeyoko
wrote:
> On Friday 01 Nov 2013 05:37:14 I wrote:
> >The advice on how to manage exit problems seems to
> > be very sound and Tor is defensible because it is being abused by
> > torrenting also.
> >
>
> ...and this is something else I don't
Please excuse my ignorance operating Tor relays, but if I run an exit
node on Windows 7 and use something like Peerblock and correspoding
block lists of P2P sites, wouldn't this be somewhat effective in
stopping this sort of undesired traffic on Tor?
On 11/1/2013 10:48 AM, Paritesh Boyeyoko wrote
On Friday 01 Nov 2013 05:37:14 I wrote:
>The advice on how to manage exit problems seems to
> be very sound and Tor is defensible because it is being abused by
> torrenting also.
>
...and this is something else I don't quite understand. People who know about
Tor (which obviously includes exit o
policy against them.
Just have a go.
Robert
> -Original Message-
> From: parity@gmail.com
> Sent: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 11:18:53 +
> To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Amazon abuse report
>
> On Thursday 31 Oct 2013 21:52:41 Roger Din
On Thursday 31 Oct 2013 21:52:41 Roger Dingledine wrote:
> The main reason for this choice is the number of people who've told us
> that they are only able to run exit relays because "it's what Tor does
> when you run a relay", and their institution wouldn't let them do it if
> it required a manua
Gordon Morehouse:
> Yeah... you guys would know better than me about that, but speaking
> from the perspective of a small fish, the exit-as-default torrc is a
> serious "WTF?" and always has been, given potential legal trouble in
> privacy-hostile countries.
I have phrased this differently but I b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Roger Dingledine:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 06:12:47PM -0700, Andy Isaacson wrote:
>> That's correct, it takes a deliberate action on the part of the
>> administrator to become a relay; and another deliberate action to
>> become an exit relay.
>
>
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 09:52:41PM -0400, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 06:12:47PM -0700, Andy Isaacson wrote:
> > That's correct, it takes a deliberate action on the part of the
> > administrator to become a relay; and another deliberate action to become
> > an exit relay.
>
>
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 06:12:47PM -0700, Andy Isaacson wrote:
> That's correct, it takes a deliberate action on the part of the
> administrator to become a relay; and another deliberate action to become
> an exit relay.
Actually, that second part isn't true. Once you decide to become a relay,
the
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 12:53:48AM +, Paritesh Boyeyoko wrote:
> On a related note, just out of interest why was the decision taken that the
> default exit policy for an out-of-the-box relay allows any exits at all?
Out of the box, relays don't allow exit at all.
A relay admin has to explici
On Thursday 31 Oct 2013 15:34:20 Andreas Krey wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 10:43:41 +, Paritesh Boyeyoko wrote:
> ...
>
> > This is something which has always confused/annoyed me. How can a Tor
> > node
> > (unless it's exposing its SOCKS interface to the whole world) be classed
> > as an "op
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 10:43:41 +, Paritesh Boyeyoko wrote:
...
> This is something which has always confused/annoyed me. How can a Tor node
> (unless it's exposing its SOCKS interface to the whole world) be classed as
> an
> "open proxy"?
The 'open proxy' is simply a tag on the IP address; i
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Tom Ritter wrote:
> On 29 October 2013 22:53, Sanjeev Gupta wrote:
>> Yes, to some extent. I edited the config, as I was willing to pay for the
>> extra bandwidth, and enabled an Exit Relay.
>>
>> I was under the impression that this was permitted.
>
> Amazon do
On Wednesday 30 Oct 2013 08:43:21 Tom Ritter wrote:
> On 29 October 2013 22:53, Sanjeev Gupta wrote:
> > Yes, to some extent. I edited the config, as I was willing to pay for the
> > extra bandwidth, and enabled an Exit Relay.
> >
> > I was under the impression that this was permitted.
>
> Amaz
On 29 October 2013 22:53, Sanjeev Gupta wrote:
> Yes, to some extent. I edited the config, as I was willing to pay for the
> extra bandwidth, and enabled an Exit Relay.
>
> I was under the impression that this was permitted.
Amazon does not like Exit Nodes running in EC2. I'm not sure if there
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 7:49 PM, I wrote:
> Is there confusion between using the special version of Tor designed to be
> a bridge on Amazon's EC² which uses a limited volume of data so to stay
> within the free offer for the free year Amazon offers?
Yes, to some extent. I edited the config, as
2013 23:17:15 -0700
> To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Amazon abuse report
>
> On 28.10.2013 22:10, Sanjeev Gupta wrote:
>> Since Tor Cloud https://cloud.torproject.org/ suggests running on Amazon
>> EC2, I am confused.
>
> Tor Cloud
On 28.10.2013 22:10, Sanjeev Gupta wrote:
> Since Tor Cloud https://cloud.torproject.org/ suggests running on Amazon
> EC2, I am confused.
Tor Cloud images are configured to act as bridges. You can run non-exit
relays on Amazon EC2, but the cost are comparatively expensive. As
you've found out, Am
Hi,
I am running a number of Tor relays, in my own DC and at Amazon Singapore.
I got an email from Amazon last week, for the Windows instance:
==
Hello,
It's come to our attention that one of your EC2 instances may be configured
as a Tor exit node. Please note that any open proxy activity is pr
60 matches
Mail list logo
