Matthew Finkel:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 03:01:31PM -0500, Roger Dingledine wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 07:42:11PM +0000, Matthew Finkel wrote:
>>> Are you running this relay at your home? If yes, then that is not
>>> recommended, but
>> For the record, it's running *exit* relays at home that is not
>> recommended. Running non-exit relays at home is typically fine -- the
>> most likely problems are that some overzealous blacklist will put your
>> IP address on their list, making some websites not work so well for you
>> if you also use that IP address for your own traffic. Some of these
>> overzealous blacklists are just being stupid, because they don't
>> understand about exit policies:
>> but others of them are intentionally trying to harm people who are
>> trying to support Tor:
> Just for the record, this is exactly why I don't recommend it from my
> exerience. I lost access to my bank's website (plus some other sites)
> for a while because I did this. It's must less risky running a non-exit
> than running an exit, but there may be unintended side effects that make
> the experience less fun overall for the operator.

+1 on that.

With the direction things are moving (. . .), I tend to think avoiding
the possibility of residential IPs being blacklisted is a smart move.
Run a bridge at home, and install a pluggable transport.

I was first aware of non-exit Tor IPs being blacklisted by a bank
several years ago in Latin America... in a country which, at that point,
had few relays.

It's good node operator practices IMHO.  Being blacklisted on a
residential connection is a bad gateway into the relay operator club.



34A6 0A1F F8EF B465 866F F0C5 5D92 1FD1 ECF6 1682
tor-relays mailing list

Reply via email to