-----
>
>___
>tor-relays mailing list
>tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(
your provider's reaction, because they
>may want you do something about the complaint, even if
>it's something ineffective.
>
>Tim
>___
>tor-relays mailing list
>tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/m
address2a02:898:24:84::1
Kind regards,
Rejo Zenger
++ 12/12/16 21:39 +1100 - teor:
On 12 Dec. 2016, at 19:15, Rejo Zenger <r...@zenger.nl> wrote:
Hey!
I do have IPv6 available, but I hadn't taken the time to actually enable it. I
will look into it one of the next days and when e
Hey!
I do have IPv6 available, but I hadn't taken the time to actually enable
it. I will look into it one of the next days and when enabled, I'll let
you know about the IPv6 address.
Node: rejozenger, FP: AA0D167E03E298F9A8CD50F448B81FBD7FA80D56
Kind regards,
Rejo Zenger
++ 12/12/16
>should be documented somewhere).
If it is abuse-related, this may be the place:
https://blog.torproject.org/blog/tips-running-exit-node-minimal-harassment
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP 1FBF 7B37 6537
I do agree with the gist of your message. However, I wish you could say
there are 'tens of thousands of exit operators'. :)
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP 1FBF 7B37 6537 68B1 2532 A4CB 0994 0946 21DB E
or reasons as diversity.
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP 1FBF 7B37 6537 68B1 2532 A4CB 0994 0946 21DB EFD4
XMPP OTR 271A 9186 AFBC 8124 18CF 4BE2 E000 E708 F811 5ACF
Signal0507 A41B F4D6 5DB4 937D E
and hardly
ever there is a follow-up to that. Rarely I see a request from a LEA,
which always get more or less the same answer (a denial + explanation).
In other words, it doesn't take too much time (provided you run your
relay with reduced exit policy - or stricter).
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl
pretty
sure that will change sooner or later (but even then I don't expect that
data to be retained for any more than seconds).
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP 1FBF 7B37 6537 68B1 2532 A4CB 0994 0946
of the risks: your connection may be shut-down by your provider.
For a write-up in Dutch:
https://www.bof.nl/2014/12/17/juridische-risicos-van-het-draaien-van-een-tor-node/
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP
, that one really should be rejected. It is the
Some (or most or even all) of the Leaseweb nodes didn't forward port 25.
So, alltough you advice is a good one, it's not applicable to some (or
most or even all) of the nodes that are discussed in this thread.
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0
there has been a policy change on some sites deploying particular
DNSBL's triggering a change of policy within Leaseweb. So many
possibilities to choose from. :)
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP 1FBF 7B37 6537
, not for blocking. Of course, any administrator is free to
use this DNSBL he or she wants.
There's not much you can do - other than just not running the Tor-node.
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP 1FBF 7B37
to use or not to use a
list.
And yes, I am aware some issues may arise if one of thoses lists has a
large user base (as, in that case, the compiler of that list may (ab)use
that power). It's not that I am 100% in favor of these lists. :)
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W
-het-draaien-van-een-tor-node/
[1] You do no initiate the transmission, you do no select the receiver
of the transmission and you do not select or modify the information
contained in the transmission.
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T
these issues myself. However, if
someone wants to look into this, let me know and I am more than happy to
provide the details needed.
[1] https://rejo.zenger.nl/tmp/94.142.240.243_10-year.png
[1] https://rejo.zenger.nl/tmp/94.142.240.243_10-week.png
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738
the time (and lacking expertise to do this
efficiently) to investigate these issues. If anyone else is interested,
I am more than happy to help - of course.
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP 1FBF 7B37 6537
. The intentions of the owner a different, for
a starter. Anyway, I am not sure whether this is worth a discussion or
debate on this list.
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP 1FBF 7B37 6537 68B1 2532 A4CB 0994
from responsibility for transmitted information under the
term of this law. There's no precedence to my knowledge, but
[...]
That's right. Like I said: there is no case law, but it would be a most
interesting case.
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
configuring the rejection in the Tor
configuration that gets published.
As far as I know, there is no case law, so results may differ.
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP 1FBF 7B37 6537 68B1 2532 A4CB 0994 0946
just ignore those.
I have had exactly the same experience with valuehost.ru. At this moment
I'm ignoring any automated notification I receive from them.
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP 1FBF 7B37 6537
be held
responsible for the traffic that is routed via your node.
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https://rejo.zenger.nl
T @rejozenger | J r...@zenger.nl
OpenPGP 1FBF 7B37 6537 68B1 2532 A4CB 0994 0946 21DB EFD4
XMPP OTR 271A 9186 AFBC 8124 18CF 4BE2 E000 E708
configuration to maximize the utulisation (with some other traffic on
the same link as well):
MaxAdvertisedBandwidth 400 KB
RelayBandwidthRate 200 KB
RelayBandwidthBurst 400 KB
AccountingMax 400 GB
AccountingStart month 1 00:00
--
Rejo Zenger
E r...@zenger.nl | P +31(0)639642738 | W https
Tor, why it is
important to have Tor around and how the complainer could block traffic
from Tor exit nodes if really needed. Ignoring doesn't explain the
importance - or, if it does, in an arogant way.
--
Rejo Zenger . r...@zenger.nl . 0x21DBEFD4 . https://rejo.zenger.nl
GPG encrypted e-mail
, verified based on IP-address and key. I was presented with a certificate
I believe was valid.
--
Rejo Zenger r...@zenger.nl| GPG: 0x21DBEFD4
https://rejo.zenger.nl/
+31 (0) 6 39 64 27 38
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
On 31 aug. 2012, at 00:35, Dude wrote:
So that leaves colo, but this gets expensive fast. This is very expensive
outside the USA. Could I work as an agent of torservers.net? Is there a FAQ
listing friendly ISPs?
See: https://www.torservers.net/wiki/hoster/index
--
Rejo Zenger . r
registration itself?
--
Rejo Zenger . r...@zenger.nl . 0x21DBEFD4 . https://rejo.zenger.nl
GPG encrypted e-mail preferred . +31.6.39642738 . @rejozenger
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor
send updates by e-mail.
--
Rejo Zenger . r...@zenger.nl . 0x21DBEFD4 . https://rejo.zenger.nl
GPG encrypted e-mail preferred . +31.6.39642738 . @rejozenger
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
tor-relays mailing
split the money).
And what happens if there's doubt about the node someone is running? For a
starter, maybe a solution would be: individuals are reimbursed a limited amount
only, where larger amounts is available to legally registered foundations.
--
Rejo Zenger . r...@zenger.nl . 0x21DBEFD4
. The ones you are
looking for are:
RelayBandwidthRate
RelayBandwidthBurst
AccountingMax
AccountingStart
Any suggestions how to measure the traffic would be appreciated, must be
roughly 12 TB the last 2 days.
There are a number of approaches. I am running vnstat for this purpose.
--
Rejo Zenger . r
30 matches
Mail list logo