[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

[tor-relays] Re: Netscan Hetzner

To: tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [tor-relays] Re: Netscan Hetzner
From: forest-relay-contact--- via tor-relays <tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2025 08:42:43 -0000
In-reply-to: <424445af-eb41-27d9-ef61-3508a64d3251@wcbsecurity.com>
List-id: "support and questions about running Tor relays (exit, non-exit, bridge)" <tor-relays.lists.torproject.org>
References: <424445af-eb41-27d9-ef61-3508a64d3251@wcbsecurity.com>
Reply-to: forest-relay-contact@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: HyperKitty on https://lists.torproject.org/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hello.

Chris Enkidu-6 wrote:
> As for your other claim, I decided to do a relay search. Out of over
> 9400 Tor relays 407 of them are operated out of Hetzner (As24940). You
> as a single Tor operator control around 750 relays give or take. Which
> one would you say is a bigger security risk?

To be fair, a relay operator running hundreds of relays is less likely
to be a risk because they are less likely to be monitoring or exporting
traffic flows. That's not to say that monitoring traffic flows is bad,
but if someone came up to a relay operator and said "hey, send us highly
detailed traffic statistics and metadata and some money and we'll alert
you if we detect anything suspicious", the operator is more likely to
report the offer here than to sign a contract and call it good business
sense.

Ability to correlate traffic != willingness to engage in activities that
would make traffic correlation feasible.

Regards,
forest
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=3XBS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list -- tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to tor-relays-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Follow-Ups:
- [tor-relays] Re: Netscan Hetzner
  - From: Tor at 1AEO via tor-relays

References:
- [tor-relays] Re: Netscan Hetzner
  - From: Chris Enkidu-6 via tor-relays

Prev by Author: [tor-relays] Re: Questions about running an exit relay
Next by Author: [tor-relays] Re: Relay forest18 is still not on the consensus
Previous by thread: [tor-relays] Re: Netscan Hetzner
Next by thread: [tor-relays] Re: Netscan Hetzner
Index(es):
- Author
- Thread