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

Re: Whitedust article

Hash: SHA256

Ok, so we should place rules of some kind...
So who should police these rules and how should they be impemented?

Many people have different configurations so the rules may be different for
each person.
So we should perhaps rely on ourselves to impose our own rules? But then,
will that cause outsiders to look upon tor as unregulated and therefore

This is interesting so far...  Who else has an idea?


Euman wrote:

>On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 08:05 -0500, Void Beast wrote:
>>So are we doomed to the blacklist of the internet? Or are we on the
>>bleeding edge of a new era of digital freedom? I can see this going both
>if 'tor' is made to be respectable it shouldn't be blacklisted.
>Anyone with ethereal can re-assemble packets so there goes the digital
>There should be in place certain rules (what rules Im unsure of)
>for instance on my box I allow 9001 for the Tor Server and 9030 for
>the Directory service and Ive noted that any ip using ports
>that aren't routed through the 'tor' application are auto-blacklisted
>by me. I might be an open-proxy but I keep an eye on things so,
>there should be a mechanism put in place for everyone that does
>exactly what Ive described.
>e,g: inbound tor or-port - destination app tor [allowed]
>     inbound tor or-port - destination app null [denied]
>doesn't matter what port the destination goes to as long as it's routed
>through the 'tor' application.
>How to implement this is beyond me atm with the exception of keeping a
>steady eye on your firewall.
>Please inform me that I don't know what the hek I'm talking about and
>that I should just shutup...
>my $0.04 (inflation)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.2 (Build 2424)