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

(FWD) Re: seven bloxortsipt* relays ought *not* to be Valid

[Forwarding since truxton appears not to be subscribed to or-talk. As
for the questions: a) yes, you should upgrade, that version is way old,
and b) check out

----- Forwarded message from owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -----

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 23:24:31 -0700
From: Truxton Fulton <truxton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: grarpamp <grarpamp@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, support@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: seven bloxortsipt* relays ought *not* to be Valid

On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 02:10:34 -0400
grarpamp <grarpamp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >  "bloxortsipt":
> the more eyes on the nodes the better.
> >         a) are running an obsolete version of tor ( 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 :)


Thanks for the heads up.
Is (a) not good because of a security hole?  I will upgrade.
I dont understand about (c).  All my "bloxortsipt" nodes are
related, although they are geographically distributed, why/how
should they be listed as a family?


----- End forwarded message -----