On 10/29/2015 09:18 PM, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 05:25:31PM -0600, Mirimir wrote:
>> On 10/29/2015 05:20 PM, Green Dream wrote:
>>> Unfortunately that line
>>> of the exit policy isn't displayed on Atlas. You can see the full policy on
>>> Globe:
>>>
>>> https://globe.torp
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 05:25:31PM -0600, Mirimir wrote:
> On 10/29/2015 05:20 PM, Green Dream wrote:
> > Unfortunately that line
> > of the exit policy isn't displayed on Atlas. You can see the full policy on
> > Globe:
> >
> > https://globe.torproject.org/#/relay/F77FD005BF74CD0B4C611389C300645
On 10/29/2015 05:20 PM, Green Dream wrote:
>> I cannot imagine how any TOR operator would block encrypted services
>> and not be what most reasonable people consider a "Bad exit".
>
>
> It turns out this "HoneyPot" node is NOT blocking encrypted services. They
> allow ports 443, 993, and other en
> I cannot imagine how any TOR operator would block encrypted services
> and not be what most reasonable people consider a "Bad exit".
It turns out this "HoneyPot" node is NOT blocking encrypted services. They
allow ports 443, 993, and other encrypted services. Unfortunately that line
of the exit
Given the current state of the internet (ie, massive warrantless spying
by LEO's and packet inspection by ISP's) I cannot imagine how any TOR
operator would block encrypted services and not be what most reasonable
people consider a "Bad exit".
On 2015-10-29 14:05, Mike Perry wrote:
> Green D
> BTW the exit policy includes 443.
My mistake. I didn't realize the policy view on Atlas is truncated.
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Is the end of the month. Maybe they ran out of bandwidth and will be
back 11/1. LeaseWeb over-limit rates are terrifying.
BTW the exit policy includes 443.
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin
On 10/29/2015 03:05 PM, Mike Perry wrote:
> Green Dream:
>> Mirimir: aside from the nickname, do you have any reason to believe it was
>> out of the ordinary? The exit policy mostly only seems to allow
>> non-encrypted services (80 but not 443, 143
>
> A while ago we were actively marking nodes th
On 10/29/2015 02:42 PM, Green Dream wrote:
> (Oops, sorry, an errant keyboard shortcut sent the email too early.)
>
> Mirimir: aside from the nickname, do you have any reason to believe it was
> out of the ordinary? The exit policy mostly only seems to allow
> non-encrypted services (80 but not 44
Green Dream:
> Mirimir: aside from the nickname, do you have any reason to believe it was
> out of the ordinary? The exit policy mostly only seems to allow
> non-encrypted services (80 but not 443, 143
A while ago we were actively marking nodes that only allowed
non-encrypted services as BadExit,
(Oops, sorry, an errant keyboard shortcut sent the email too early.)
Mirimir: aside from the nickname, do you have any reason to believe it was
out of the ordinary? The exit policy mostly only seems to allow
non-encrypted services (80 but not 443, 143 but not 993), but that alone
isn't enough to g
Mirimir: aside from the nickname, do you have any reason to believe it was
out of the ordinary? The exit policy mostly only seems to allow
non-encrypted services (80 but not 443, 143
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Mirimir wrote:
> Anyone know what HoneyPot was/is?
>
>
> https://atlas.torprojec
Probably someone being cute in their naming scheme.
Nchinda^2, -0.1743*kg^6 m^4 mol s^-14, @firescar96
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Mirimir wrote:
> Anyone know what HoneyPot was/is?
>
>
> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/F77FD005BF74CD0B4C611389C3006452AEC60CA3
>
13 matches
Mail list logo