Also related, has anyone tried operating an exit
behind a VPN/NAT/proxy service? As opposed
to having secondary interfaces/routes on the
local machine.
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012 01:58:40 + (UTC)
Sven Olaf Kamphuis s...@cb3rob.net wrote:
[Utopian fantasy]
Meanwhile, back in the Real World, ancient protocols like SMTP dominate
the Internet (oh look, you used it to post to this list) and people
do what they have to in order to keep their services
I have a real world example of this. My forum was being abused by several
users all originating from the Tor network, so the first thing I did (and
any sane admin would do) was block Tor access (with a note) for a few hours
while I figured out what to do. I ended up unbloacking the network and
I have the opposite problem in a way. I use geocaching.org
frequently. But because they have had a problem in the past with Tor
users they block Tor nodes. As I run a Relay, not Exit, this means
that I have to ask for an exception every time my IP changes Happily
that doesn't happen very often
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012 18:42:56 -0500
Bill Waggoner ctgreybe...@gmail.com wrote:
I have the opposite problem in a way. I use geocaching.org
frequently. But because they have had a problem in the past with Tor
users they block Tor nodes. As I run a Relay, not Exit, this means
that I have to
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 07:44:48 -0800
Aaron aag...@extc.org wrote:
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Moritz Bartl mor...@torservers.net
wrote:
I don't think it's a good idea. People are always thankful when I
can point them to the bulk exit list and torDNSel. I point out that
Tor has a lot of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Shouldn't some exit relays (funded or not) be deployed to use an
exit IP that is different from it's advertised exit IP in order to
prevent a simplistic form of blocking based on scraping the
descriptor set? I think this can happen if the
On 24.11.2012 12:46, tagnaq wrote:
Shouldn't some exit relays (funded or not) be deployed to use an
exit IP that is different from it's advertised exit IP in order to
prevent a simplistic form of blocking based on scraping the
descriptor set?
I don't think it's a good idea. People are always
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Moritz Bartl mor...@torservers.net wrote:
On 24.11.2012 12:46, tagnaq wrote:
Shouldn't some exit relays (funded or not) be deployed to use an
exit IP that is different from it's advertised exit IP in order to
prevent a simplistic form of blocking based on
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 05:20:03 -0400
grarpamp grarp...@gmail.com wrote:
Shouldn't some exit relays (funded or not) be deployed
to use an exit IP that is different from it's advertised
exit IP in order to prevent a simplistic form of blocking
based on scraping the descriptor set? I think this
10 matches
Mail list logo
