[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-talk] Idiotical abuses against Tor-servers
> Frankly speeking, I don't understand what is the claim. Somebody -
> through my node - visit their web-site using client's web-browser...
> For resolving that abuse report I include their ip-address in my exit
> reject policy... And send them a message in which I note that posting
> abusing against Tor servers can create troubles to their clients which
> may have an interest in their anonymity to accesse to them Internet
I would tell them as well that YOU blocked their IP in your exit policy
but all the other exit node operators don't, so if they really, really
want to prevent such things without always having to deal with abuse
etc, they should block tor. Or they should live with it. Everything else
won't work over a longer period of time.
> But it is so strange - if they don't want that anybody connect them
> through the Tor, what is the problem to blacklist the list of Tor-exits?
> Why they mean that it needs to post abuses?
Maybe because they are technically incompetent to do so? It might be
cheaper to buy some auto-complaining appliance which bothers abuse teams
because someone rips their webpage.
> Maybe it is a latent action against Tor-net in whole? Or it is simply an
> idiocy of their system administrators?
I think the latter.
tor-talk mailing list