[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: exit counts by port number over 61 days
- To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: exit counts by port number over 61 days
- From: Tripple Moon <tripple.moon@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 01:21:04 -0700 (PDT)
- Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 04:21:08 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1240129264; bh=FCK9eI+Xa8jTFx06glTrc3+8TWlFakA2PF7cT/1szLE=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=6j8ds2DikdkG9thOJDQSI9ClKhoDGlit9AVTDslD0aLwrwnRuMEm+B70YZP0IZxhVdlNGDQplMLvyxyYxRMNXSNNf7oX5rAAyFFbI6aEoKSNlt81sXESan46NhDuRgEMcWOVDoN75xe64lDS0UqNeS/WYXf/t648HA642a6EvxM=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ovNMxtKcxegwYnTy52Gl6YyAd9Nih2Rqr4V+ed5iVuZOiqJLsY/XVfM8ZzaeoaWNXIPTU+Z57nzZbdoQfFeBTWxhyVlMmgn0CSkyyUfE1t+yJw4AyI7/tKylO7+zzAyXgS7AJ5oApVpvUePXMfJo/hnRd+8UTO6ohqvc9yF3Wj4=;
- In-reply-to: <7imyafudw2.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--- On Fri, 4/17/09, Juliusz Chroboczek <Juliusz.Chroboczek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Juliusz Chroboczek <Juliusz.Chroboczek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: exit counts by port number over 61 days
> To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Friday, April 17, 2009, 6:14 PM
> > A better [idea] would be, again IMHO, open a list of
> ports used by
> > "normal-use of the tor-network", and block
> the rest. [...]
>
> > Web (80,443), Pop3 (*), NNTP (*), DNS (53), Torrent
> (default 6881), FTP
> > (20/21).
>
> Moon,
>
> Please don't give this kind of advice. Somebody might
> think you know what
> you're speaking about.
The beauty of internet is that everyone can write its own opinions (see my IMHO) and let the rest decide if the writer (you included) knows what (s)he is writing about...
>
> Your list includes Bittorrent, which is a highly optimised
> protocol for sending massive amounts of data.
> Running BT over the tor network is considered as an abuse of the network.
ASFAIK, its up to the operator of relays and exit-points to decide what they label as abuse or not, and as a result choose to reject data on that port.
>
> Your list doesn't include for example 22 (ssh), which
> is absolutely essential for many of us.
Well see...from my point of view SSH is abuse of the tor-network, namely aiding in hacking other systems. (see my other posts for my logic)
To use SSH you need an account thats under normal circumstances is known on the other side, thus eliminating the need to anonymize your connection.
So yea i will advice all that read this to reject that port whole heartly...
IMHO, the intentions of the tor-network are to provide anonymity for data connections where the other side does not _need_ to know who the originator is.
If i'm wrong there i'm sure it will be told so by many instead of one...