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

Re: (FWD) quick question on exit policy...

On 1/27/06, Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> [Forwarding because Joe is not subscribed as this address.
>
> The answer is yes, this will work fine, but the way you say
> it is 128.32.0.0/255.255.0.0:* or 128.32.0.0/16:*
> -RD]

Thanks and thanks again, Roger.  Hopefully I can convince them that I
can write a set of exit policies that ensure no exit traffic to
Berkeley IP addresses... it would be too bad (and not nearly as useful
from a research/educational point of view) if we ended up with a
middleman node. best, Joe

> ----- Forwarded message from owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -----
>
> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:57:03 -0800
> From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joehall@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: joehall@xxxxxxxxx
> To: or-talk@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: quick question on exit policy...
>
> Hi,
>
> In order to get a TOR server up and running on the Berkeley campus,
> I'd like to know if it's possible to specify an exit policy that
> effectively said, "don't allow any exit connections that would connect
> to the UC Berkeley network."  Would this be sufficient:
>
> reject 128.32.*.*:*
>
> To, say, block all exits to any ports to IPs in the range
> 128.32.0.0-128.32.255.255?
>
> best, Joe
>
> --
> Joseph Lorenzo Hall
> <http://josephhall.org/>
>
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
>


--
Joseph Lorenzo Hall
PhD Student
UC Berkeley, School of Information (SIMS)
<http://josephhall.org/>
blog: <http://josephhall.org/nqb2/>

This email is written in [markdown] - an easily-readable and parseable
text format.
[markdown]: http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/