## spammers might also collect them. You may want to obscure the fact that
## it's an email address and/or generate a new address for this purpose.
#ContactInfo Random Person
## You might also include your PGP or GPG fingerprint if you have one:
#ContactInfo 0x Random Person
Contac
le point of failure. It would be easy
enough to have a volunteer bgp announce a specific ip address. If they
decided to drop out then it would not cause this type of consternation
in the future. Having more than one bridge auth has obvious benefits.
Flame me away for my ignorance. It has been years since i last poured
over the tor source code.
--- Marina Brown
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/29/2014 11:07 PM, David Stainton wrote:
> Sounds like a viable plan. What specifically do you need help
> with?
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 8:34 PM, Andreas Fritzel
> wrote:
>> Hey all,
>>
>> In two different countries I run 3 Tor bridges for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/28/2013 11:36 AM, The Doctor wrote:
> On 08/27/2013 05:12 PM, Tor Exit wrote:
>
>> Why is it so bad if a Tor exit operator tries to match the use
>> of their node with their own moral beliefs?
>
> Exercising one's moral beliefs can censor other
mmediate
> demise is better for the species as a whole.
>
I also disable password access only leaving ssh key. They can try all
they want but fail2ban will block them for a day with my settings.
Some resume attacking after ban time is up.
- --- Marina Brown
> -andy _
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/02/2013 03:18 PM, Bryan Carey wrote:
> Is there any kind of compiled list of IPs that relay operators can
> refer to that are known bad IPs (sources of brute force SSH
> attempts, etc.)? Is there a reason to NOT block (drop) traffic from
> these
ost of dealing
> with 'complaints'.
It seems they may already have changed their AUP.
'contain any kind of proxy server or other traffic relaying programs'.
- --- Marina Brown
>
> They are in New Hampshire, perhaps you could let the
> FreeStateProject know (cc:
abuse admin will often take the easy way out and get rid of a
customer that generates little income and lots of complaints while high
end customers are granted a bit more leeway, but even there dealing with
legal complaints can make a good deal unprofitable.
- --- Marina Brown
>
>
>
eech friendly ISP, it
would be easier for Tor adversaries to block their IP space.
Education is important but the battle between geek and suit was lost
long ago.
- --- Marina Brown
> Mick
>
ce would still be listed and the rDNS
would have to be delegated from the provider nameserver.
Persistant complainants will always CC the upstream of the ip space
anyway.
A /24 would be better as you could shield the upstream a tiny bit more.
Multi/anycast, at least using BGP, require the as
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/05/2013 01:59 PM, TonyXue wrote:
This can happen if a DNS server is listening on several ip addresses
but answers from it's base address.
I have dealt with this recently changing from DJBDNS to Unbound.
- Marina Brown
> Hi
11 matches
Mail list logo
