On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 06:16:25AM +, oneoft...@riseup.net wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can someone point me to an overview of the different legal situations for
> running tor relays in European countries? I'm especially interested how the
> situation differs per country.
>
I'm from the luxembourgish tor
Moritz Bartl wrote
Thu, 12 Mar 2015 09:58:00 +0100:
| >>> I mean the only reason, why there is more Tor-Exit-IPs
| in the abuse log than any other single unique IP is that there is tens
| of thousand of users using each Tor-Exit.
| >> If this claim could be substantiated by some numbers
On 03/11/2015 10:57 PM, yl wrote:
>>> I mean the only reason, why there is more Tor-Exit-IPs
in the abuse log than any other single unique IP is that there is tens
of thousand of users using each Tor-Exit.
>> If this claim could be substantiated by some numbers it'd certainly help.
> I fu
Am 09.03.2015 um 23:39 schrieb Markus Hitter:
>> I mean the only reason, why there is more Tor-Exit-IPs
>> > in the abuse log than any other single unique IP is that there is tens
>> > of thousand of users using each Tor-Exit.
> If this claim could be substantiated by some numbers it'd certainly he
On 2015-03-09 18:40, Markus Hitter wrote:
Am 09.03.2015 um 16:08 schrieb Steve Snyder:
Being able to separate webmail from the parent web presence (e.g.
gmail from google.com, Yahoo Mail from yahoo.com, etc.) would be a
big step forward in curbing spam. This would allow the exit
operation to re
This is definitely a positive for the UK. One of many battles we could
have easily lost to a conservative government pushing authoritarian
policies. As long as it doesn't get pushed under the carpet this could
help defend the cause of civil liberties. Here are two articles on it:
http://bit.ly/199d
In the UK:
The darknet and online anonymity - POST Note
Published 09 March 2015
It's a briefing from The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology,
mainly about Tor.
http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/POST-PN-488/the-darknet-and-online-anonymity
Jan
___
Am 09.03.2015 um 23:09 schrieb yl:
> So wouldn't the correct solution also be to educate the administrators
> of such services?
Yes, of course. With the _also_ underlined.
> I mean the only reason, why there is more Tor-Exit-IPs
> in the abuse log than any other single unique IP is that there is
On March 9, 2015 11:16:34 PM yl wrote:
Am 09.03.2015 um 22:53 schrieb Markus Hitter:
> It certainly wasn't meant this way. The point of these considerations is:
of what use is an anonymous network if virtually no website accepts
connections from it? Right: it's of not much use, with most of t
Am 09.03.2015 um 22:53 schrieb Markus Hitter:
> It certainly wasn't meant this way. The point of these considerations is: of
> what use is an anonymous network if virtually no website accepts connections
> from it? Right: it's of not much use, with most of the public internet
> blocked you can c
Am 09.03.2015 um 20:33 schrieb grarpamp:
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Markus Hitter wrote:
>> > Am 09.03.2015 um 16:08 schrieb Steve Snyder:
>>> >> Being able to separate webmail from the parent web presence (e.g.
>>> >> gmail from google.com, Yahoo Mail from yahoo.com, etc.) would be a
>>> >
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 3:41 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> You could create a user maintained wikitable of all countries in
> regard to line items of relavence to people in anonymizing networks,
> crypto, retention, etc.
In fact, collaboration with researchers such as Koops to present the
relavent info in
++ 09/03/15 06:16 + - oneoft...@riseup.net:
Can someone point me to an overview of the different legal situations
for running tor relays in European countries? I'm especially
interested how the situation differs per country.
I can't really help you: I don't have the overview of Europe, nor
On Monday, March 9, 2015 3:33pm, "grarpamp" said:
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Markus Hitter wrote:
>> Am 09.03.2015 um 16:08 schrieb Steve Snyder:
>>> Being able to separate webmail from the parent web presence (e.g.
>>> gmail from google.com, Yahoo Mail from yahoo.com, etc.) would be a
>>
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Sebastian Urbach wrote:
> On March 9, 2015 7:17:20 AM oneoft...@riseup.net wrote:
>> Can someone point me to an overview of the different legal situations
>> for running tor relays in European countries? I'm especially interested
>> how the situation differs per cou
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Markus Hitter wrote:
> Am 09.03.2015 um 16:08 schrieb Steve Snyder:
>> Being able to separate webmail from the parent web presence (e.g.
>> gmail from google.com, Yahoo Mail from yahoo.com, etc.) would be a
>> big step forward in curbing spam. This would allow the
Am 09.03.2015 um 16:08 schrieb Steve Snyder:
> Being able to separate webmail from the parent web presence (e.g.
> gmail from google.com, Yahoo Mail from yahoo.com, etc.) would be a
> big step forward in curbing spam. This would allow the exit
> operation to refuse traffic to the webmail service w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 09.03.2015 um 16:02 schrieb s7r:
> Your arguments are fair and correct and mostly I tend to agree.
>
> But, the port scans, malware distribution and spamming existed before
> Tor, exist in parallel with Tor and will continue to exist even if Tor
>
On Monday, March 9, 2015 10:40am, "Markus Hitter" said:
> Am 09.03.2015 um 15:13 schrieb s7r:
[snip]
> One flaw which IMHO has to be solved sooner or later is the openess to abuse.
> Like
> port scans, like malware distribution, like spamming, you name it. Right now
> this
> task is left to the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Markus,
Your arguments are fair and correct and mostly I tend to agree.
But, the port scans, malware distribution and spamming existed before
Tor, exist in parallel with Tor and will continue to exist even if Tor
will disappear.
I admin a lot of s
On March 9, 2015 3:14:37 PM s7r wrote:
Hi,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 3/9/2015 1:17 PM, Sebastian Urbach wrote:
> On March 9, 2015 7:17:20 AM oneoft...@riseup.net wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
>> Can someone point me to an overview of the different legal
>> situations for ru
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 09.03.2015 um 15:13 schrieb s7r:
> This is a speculation and it's not backed up by anything real. Can you
> define "crack down on Tor"? People and organizations are researching
> and trying to find a flaw in Tor since Tor was born - there is a good
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 3/9/2015 1:17 PM, Sebastian Urbach wrote:
> On March 9, 2015 7:17:20 AM oneoft...@riseup.net wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
>> Can someone point me to an overview of the different legal
>> situations for running tor relays in European countries? I'm
>>
On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 06:16:25 +
oneoft...@riseup.net wrote:
> Can someone point me to an overview of the different legal situations
> for running tor relays in European countries? I'm especially
> interested how the situation differs per country.
Not exactly what you wanted, but this may be re
On March 9, 2015 7:17:20 AM oneoft...@riseup.net wrote:
Hi John,
Can someone point me to an overview of the different legal situations
for running tor relays in European countries? I'm especially interested
how the situation differs per country.
I don't think that we have something like that
Hi,
Can someone point me to an overview of the different legal situations
for running tor relays in European countries? I'm especially interested
how the situation differs per country.
Best,
John
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproje
26 matches
Mail list logo
