Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-10 Thread Roger Dingledine
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 02:36:30AM -0600, Andrew Deason wrote: > No no, that was just me thinking about how they could/should go about > it. I just meant, some form of downloading the entire list, instead of > checking one-by-one via TorDNSEL. > > If the consensus doc shouldn't be used for this,

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-09 Thread teor
> On 10 Feb 2017, at 13:13, Andrew Deason wrote: > >>> From my current conversation with them, they are aware of at least some >>> suggested ways of blocking tor entirely, but claim some issues with >>> doing so. (Something having to do with exit node IPs changing too >>>

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-09 Thread Andrew Deason
On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 15:42:21 +0100 Ralph Seichter wrote: > I'd like to add that the tone of the e-mails I received was quite > aggressive, threatening "blocking your whole business". Yes, I left this out of my own report, but this is similar to my own experience.

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-09 Thread Andrew Deason
On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 17:55:34 +1100 teor wrote: > I'd be happy to talk to them, but perhaps the tor-access list is the > best forum: > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-access > > I'd be willing to discuss their goals and how they could achieve them, >

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-09 Thread Andrew Deason
On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 18:22:33 +1100 teor wrote: > > On 8 Feb 2017, at 18:03, Andrew Deason wrote: > > > And they even gave instructions for how to block ranges from individual > > exits: > >

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-09 Thread DaKnOb
Two IPs in the US, one is FiOS.. I'm thinking they didn't even bother to hide, but that may be the case, sure. The FiOS IP is static. > On 9 Feb 2017, at 08:19, Mirimir wrote: > >> On 02/08/2017 11:25 AM, DaKnOb wrote: >> So less than 24 hours after the previous post and

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-08 Thread Mirimir
On 02/08/2017 11:25 AM, DaKnOb wrote: > So less than 24 hours after the previous post and someone, > mysteriously, subscribed the abuse mailbox to > 2,000 newsletters.. > Of course I do not have proof nor am interested on who’s behind this > and it didn’t cause any bad, just good (gave me plenty

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-08 Thread DaKnOb
So less than 24 hours after the previous post and someone, mysteriously, subscribed the abuse mailbox to > 2,000 newsletters.. Of course I do not have proof nor am interested on who’s behind this and it didn’t cause any bad, just good (gave me plenty of data to research). Also, it seems every

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-08 Thread Ralph Seichter
On 08.02.2017 08:03, Andrew Deason wrote: > WebIron is well aware of what tor is, and they seem to have an issue > with the tor network in general, not my specific node. I have had an e-mail conversation with a Webiron employee. I don't want to give details without permission, but in a nutshell,

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-08 Thread John Ricketts
Hear, hear! On Feb 8, 2017, at 02:06, DaKnOb > wrote: Incidentally yesterday I published a blog post featuring them and why their abuse e-mails are plain spam: https://blog.daknob.net/security-companies-and-abuse-e-mails/ On 08 Feb 2017, at 06:00,

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-07 Thread John Ricketts
All, I will be blunt and say that I simply ignore them. athey are fully aware of what Tor is, have been told by me and other operators how to block exit nodes and explain that we are simply a conduit. I am not ignoring them out of spite, but frankly it is tiring to be redundant. I get

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-07 Thread Andrew Deason
On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 15:09:47 +1100 Tor wrote: > I don't ignore abuse reports, and I've found that Tor's boilerplate > abuse templates almost always provide a good response. So it's just a > matter of copying and pasting the relevant section and sending it to them. > >

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-07 Thread teor
> On 8 Feb 2017, at 17:59, niftybunny wrote: > >> >> (And the likely impact on networks with few IPv4 addresses, which tend >> to be in areas with lower levels of network access: typically poorer >> areas and less well developed countries.) >> > > *citation

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-07 Thread niftybunny
> > (And the likely impact on networks with few IPv4 addresses, which tend > to be in areas with lower levels of network access: typically poorer > areas and less well developed countries.) > *citation needed niftybunny ab...@to-surf-and-protect.net

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-07 Thread teor
> On 8 Feb 2017, at 15:00, Andrew Deason wrote: > > I run an exit node, and as such, I get abuse emails like this from time > to time: > > > Mostly I ignore them, but since their automated report

Re: [tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-07 Thread Tor
On 8/02/2017 15:00, Andrew Deason wrote: > I assume some people will say this isn't even worth the effort; it's not > like it's hard to just ignore those reports. But it doesn't take much > effort to just try to talk ot them, and it perhaps helps to give tor a > reputation of cooperation and

[tor-relays] Reaching out to webiron

2017-02-07 Thread Andrew Deason
I run an exit node, and as such, I get abuse emails like this from time to time: Mostly I ignore them, but since their automated report contains the sentence "Please feel free to send us your comments or responses.",