I have been running an exit at Linode.com for a month now - no
complaints yet
On 2018/08/29 06:38, Paul Templeton wrote:
Question: are exit operators seeing many abuse complaints now days? I have only
had one in the last two months from 5 exits. I used to see a lot now nothing
really.
I
Who cares if someone is annoying or peculiar if they contribute positively?What should matter is whether their effort aligns with the collective good, in my opinion.https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/FF79CA5A50970E21E9AB320CE62C2178E963970CThat says over 17 MB/sec which would tend
Question: are exit operators seeing many abuse complaints now days? I have only
had one in the last two months from 5 exits. I used to see a lot now nothing
really.
I just find it weird.
Paul
137CF322859E400455E457DB920F65FFDD222CDF
___
tor-relays
Hi Conrad (and staff and operators),
> On 28 Aug 2018, at 22:16, Conrad Rockenhaus wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 27, 2018, at 8:02 PM, Jordan wrote:
>>
>>> ...
>>> The research in this paper
>>> (https://www.freehaven.net/anonbib/cache/DBLP:conf/ccs/EdmanS09.pdf) is
>>> becoming more relevent and
Hi,
This post is off-topic, and further discussion of this issue is off-topic.
Please don't feed the trolls.
A reminder:
This list is for "support and questions about running Tor relays".
Please:
* keep on topic, we are here to help each other run Tor relays
* make sure each post contains
The truth must come out eventually about the menace known as Greypony. Now
that people are beginning to realize what a menace to our network Greypony
really is maybe this information will finally get us to banish him once and
for all.
Greypony has no real customers. You will not find a legitimate
Thanks for the heads up.
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 8:42 PM teor wrote:
>
> > On 29 Aug 2018, at 05:38, nusenu wrote:
> >
> > Signed PGP part
> >
> >
> > Nathaniel Suchy:
> >> Is there a way to switch my current relays to use offline keys and
> >> invalidate the old keys without losing current
> On 29 Aug 2018, at 05:38, nusenu wrote:
>
> Signed PGP part
>
>
> Nathaniel Suchy:
>> Is there a way to switch my current relays to use offline keys and
>> invalidate the old keys without losing current stats?
>
> you can switch between the modes (OfflineMasterKey 0|1) but to get the best
Nathaniel Suchy:
> Is there a way to switch my current relays to use offline keys and
> invalidate the old keys without losing current stats?
you can switch between the modes (OfflineMasterKey 0|1) but to get the best out
of it,
it is best to start with fresh masterkeys that never touched an
Is there a way to switch my current relays to use offline keys and
invalidate the old keys without losing current stats?
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 7:28 AM nusenu wrote:
> Jordan:
> > I'd be much more supportive of the typical "donate x to have a relay
> > hosted for you" [1][2] rather than "host
> Yes, there are compiled tor relay packages for BSD, they exist in packages -
> for FreeBSD is pkg install tor and for OpenBSD it’s pkg_add tor.
https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/
https://www.openbsd.org/faq/index.html
> For FreeBSD, you’ll want to switch packages from
The website is old and has been updated. We are providing up do 100 MiB/s now.
Thanks,
Conrad
> On Aug 28, 2018, at 7:16 AM, livak wrote:
>
> 10 MiB/s may right for me, but I would try to get
> as much bandwidth as I could, up to the 10% of the
> consensus weight limit criteria.
>
> Livak
>
Hi Livak,
Yes, there are compiled tor relay packages for BSD, they exist in packages -
for FreeBSD is pkg install tor and for OpenBSD it’s pkg_add tor.
For FreeBSD, you’ll want to switch packages from quarterly to latest prior to
installing tor though.
You may also compile from source - the
10 MiB/s may right for me, but I would try to get
as much bandwidth as I could, up to the 10% of the
consensus weight limit criteria.
Livak
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On August 25, 2018 11:56 PM, Paul Templeton wrote:
> > About finding sponsors for
> On Aug 27, 2018, at 8:02 PM, Jordan wrote:
>
>> Tor will already avoid making circuits where two IP Addresses in the same
>> /24 are involved. The research in this paper
>> (https://www.freehaven.net/anonbib/cache/DBLP:conf/ccs/EdmanS09.pdf) is
>> becoming more relevent and is worth
Jordan:
> I'd be much more supportive of the typical "donate x to have a relay
> hosted for you" [1][2] rather than "host a relay with us" without
> maintaining them under the same family.
>
> If relays are running on his machines and he has access to relay
> keys,
Not necessarily, it depends on
16 matches
Mail list logo
