[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: seven bloxortsipt* relays ought *not* to be Valid
- To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: seven bloxortsipt* relays ought *not* to be Valid
- From: grarpamp <grarpamp@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 02:10:34 -0400
- Cc: support@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 02:10:39 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0ZKsEtebH/FEWH/CZEFmuYFaCMwzz+11nJAP5vQtbfw=; b=UyX42Ph+e3ReH43qDB1vo8fnK02GrYPex12gq1yngcMsIeNeP4FFc48pstiYfrdoW6 RdcRe4UJV6ScSHORGUXhcgV03u257uvQv39AsmrA9hRXSBZhn68r8O7Hp8B8WT/OTdNv pqFLkWsAZTs8AGrnFsHVLDAVbzwh91+WQvtZ4=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=IplmASmcD+BpRcWi1fPQaUA/20radIk2QXydJ6j+8PRDkoN0E+k2at0f2v9yp7TwmG np/1DR9IEGhgHRdOETEVdFExmPR6sQZyFdI5yijRqb2zQGusaitesLH9r3pQwn8Wv7hy ufQkPDX0OO3EbXkuX0g03sRVxBLYmoXwERwso=
- In-reply-to: <200907300601.n6U61l5J020368@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <200907300601.n6U61l5J020368@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> "bloxortsipt":
the more eyes on the nodes the better.
> a) are running an obsolete version of tor (0.1.2.19) under LINUX,
not good, for them at least.
> b) publish identical ContactInfo "1024D/E5712ECF IPT Support
neither good/bad
> c) are *NOT* listed as a family, so your client might well build a
not good
> I recommend that all relay operators concerned about security in tor do
> likewise.
umm, or or-talk people, ahem, could just say hi to them first, they
might just need a few pointers :)