On 06.10.16 14:29, Mirimir wrote: > What matters for "complaining parties" is that they're getting crap > from some exit relay. So they complain.
Sure, and I don't have a problem with that. If I get complaints, I tell the CP about Tor, and point them to the relevant information. All good until that point. > Just telling complainers to block Tor exits may resolve your issues, > but it creates others. It is a question of perspective. I don't have issues with a percentage of "bad traffic" passing through my exits. I have come to accept this as a unfortunate but necessary downside of how Tor works. The majority is "good traffic", and that's why I -- like others -- support Tor in the first place. I would not dream of removing ports 80 or 443 from my exit policies just because some malicious clients are trying to break into WordPress installations. > Arguably, it's the complainers that should be implementing IPS and/or > other measures that block whatever they don't like. Quite so. If somebody places a server on the Internet, he accepts public access. That includes the necessity to deal with "bad traffic" in one way or other. Complaining to a Tor exit operator with "you are doing a bad thing" is factually incorrect. I willingly help CPs if they show an interest, because that is polite and helps the Tor project. However, under national law, I do not have an obligation to block traffic until a court tells me to. Obviously I have no interest in lawsuits and prefer talking to people to find a solution. I just don't jump because some CP says "hop". ;-) -Ralph _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
