It might be easier for you to have the tor traffic routed through a gateway machine and have it limit bandwidth.
On 1/11/07, gabrix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
xiando wrote: >> I think this is a valid point. I ran an exit-node for a short while at home >> without thinking too much about it. The huge amount of traffic I was >> attracting (even within minutes of booting up) made me shut it off for the >> sake of personal convenience, but I don't think I will ever go back - >> > > Use bandwidth limiting? > > BandwidthRate 45 KB > BandwidthBurst 95 KB > > This is low, but that's all I can spare on my home ADSL, and at least it > contributes something. Limit your home node and it don't attract more than > you can spare. Also, you can lower it temporarily (the minimum is 20 KB) and > just -HUP tor if you need to upload a big file somewhere or something like > that. > > >> explaining to the authorities why child porn/terrorist manuals/online fraud >> appear to have originated from my home IP is not an edifying prospect, to >> say the least. >> > > This is something you need to consider if you're going to run a exit node, you > may have to face legal problems running a Tor exit server. If you are not > willing to do it then don't. My view is that if it ever comes to that then > I'll just face the legal problems, for in my view it won't be a matter of > > me vs. the state > > it'll be a matter of > > freedom (of speech) vs the state > > and if freedom vs the state has to be tried with my being involved then I'll > do it. > > >> These days I generally run a middle-man node but even that has started to >> feel inappropriate for home use. I would be amazed if regular appearances >> on directory servers does not blink wildly on some form of institutional >> radar, low-hanging fruit and all that. >> > > Middle-man don't exit any traffic. If someone puts you on a list simply for > _relaying_ encrypted traffic from A to B then that's just insane, but if > someone wants to do it, then go ahead. I really don't see how running a > middle-man node could get you into any kind of trouble (but what do I know). > > Has anyone ever got into trouble for running a middle-man node? > > >> * From a common-sense, peace-of-mind point of view, is running an exit-node >> strictly for co-located servers? Does anyone here run one at home? If so, >> have you had second thoughts? >> > > I run exit nodes co-located and also on my home ADSL. I don't have any second > thoughts, but as said, I am aware that I may get into legal trouble and I'm > 100% willing to face that if it comes to it - because, as said, I view that > as something that would be Freedom vs Tyranny, allowing Tor-servers vs. > forbidding them, not something that really has anything to do with me (apart > from my name being on the legal action because I run a tor-server, but the > case itself won't be me vs. the state, it'll be Tor vs. the state). > > >> * Are tor-at-home users who run middleman servers out of the goodness of >> their heart possibly exposing themselves to unwanted attention? Do we have >> any evidence of such attention, anecdotal or otherwise? >> > > Very good question. You'll be on the list of tor-servers, but I see no > other "attention" you could get. > > I had run an exit node as middle-man for about 5 mounthes and i never got into any kind of legal troubble apart that normal operations like browsing were impossible even bandwidth limiting BandwidthRate 20KB and BandwidthBurst 20KBthe minimum possible.I hope with new versions of tor , bandwidth limiting improved because when i used it, it didn't seem much to work .My isp says i have a 2MB connection in download but it never goes up 500KB-700KB most of the time.I was really disappointed to stop my middle-man but i had to .Let me know how you find bandwidth limiting once you start because you better start and try yourself , hasta siempre !!!
