If its an exit just use the reduced reduced exit policy - I dont get any abuse complaints apart from those heroes at webiron
Cheers Mark B Snaptor.co.uk (non commercial) > On 14 Mar 2017, at 14:36, Juuso Lapinlampi <w...@partyvan.eu> wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 02:17:14PM +0100, Moritz Bartl wrote: >> about it" might not be the best argument here either: I suggest you >> block the destination IP address(es) for some weeks via ExitPolicy, let > > My concern with this is the liability on operator. In Finland (and > Europe?), the limited liability provisions have three criteria for > service/network providers (Tietoyhteiskuntakaari 7.11.2014/917, 182 ยง > Vastuuvapaus tiedonsiirto- ja verkkoyhteyspalveluissa): > > 1. You're not the one initiating the network transfer; > 2. You're not selecting the recipient; and > 3. You don't select or modify the data to be transferred. > > I believe FICORA has advised blocking ports as necessary for security > reasons (e.g. port 25) is fine, but when it's being extended to > IP-address and/or port combinations, that's where it starts becoming > gray (in regards to #2). > > So far, replying to every abuse complaint and giving advice how to block > Tor using DNSBL or similar has worked for me. I can see it's probably > not what original poster's ISP would like to hear to have the issue > resolved, but it's less ambiguous on law and limited liability. Thus, I > suggested looking into other more friendly ISPs. > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays