> On 5 Jan 2016, at 19:33, Tom van der Woerdt <i...@tvdw.eu> wrote: > ... > Op 05/01/16 om 02:15 schreef Tim Wilson-Brown - teor: >> >>> On 5 Jan 2016, at 11:29, Tom van der Woerdt <i...@tvdw.eu >>> <mailto:i...@tvdw.eu>> wrote: >>> ... >>> 2.1. Exit flagging >>> >>> By replacing the port 6667 (IRC) entry with a port 5222 (XMPP) entry, >>> Exit >>> flags can no longer be assigned to relays that exit only to unencrypted >>> ports. >> >> One consequence of this proposal is that relays that only exit to 443 >> and 6667 will lose the Exit flag. >> But these relays do exit to an encrypted port, so this somewhat >> contradicts the goal of the proposal: >> "Exit flags can no longer be assigned to relays that exit only to >> unencrypted ports." > > ... > > (tlcr: any relay that currently holds an Exit flag and allows exiting to > 443 and 6667, but not 80 or 5222.) > > tiggersWeltTor1 Bandwidth=2600 > smallegyptrela01 Bandwidth=22 > > These two relays will be impacted, indeed.
Point taken! How many Exits would lose the Exit flag intentionally based on this change? (That is, how many have 80 & 6667, but not 443?) >> >> Why not make the rule: "at least one of 80/6667, and at least one of >> 443/5222". > > Also sounds good to me. I opted for the smallest possible change > (6667->5222) but what you're suggesting lgtm. > >> >> I am also concerned about the choice of XMMP "because the XMPP protocol >> is slowly gaining popularity within the >> communities on the internet". >> Shouldn't we focus on secure protocols that are widely used right now? >> >> Alternately, we could add other widely used SSL ports in addition to >> XMMP, and perhaps increase the rule to "at least two SSL ports". > > Imho the challenge is in finding port number(s) that accurately reflect > what Tor is for, while also having a sufficiently large user base for it > to be relevant. XMPP probably has more users than IRC, and is a good > match for what I think Tor would consider important (communication). > Also note that we now have Tor Messenger. Other protocols (SSH, IMAP, > POP3, SMTP) are indeed more popular but I feel that those less reflect > the goals of the project, and they are certainly abused more. 80/443 get us anonymous web browsing, primarily through Tor Browser 6667/6697 get us anonymous messaging via IRC (I don't know if 6697 is common enough to be worth changing for.) 5222 get us anonymous messaging via Tor Messenger I can't think of any others right now. Tim Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP 968F094B teor at blah dot im OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev