Re: [tor-relays] new relays

[Andreas Krey <a.krey@xxxxxx>]

On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 11:08:34 +0000, Jon Gardner wrote:
...
> Then why have exit policies?

To keep spammers at bay (or getting your exit blacklisted);
to keep traffic at bay (bittorrent), to keep law harrassment
at bay (again bittorrent, others as well).

> Exit nodes regularly block "unwelcome" traffic like bittorrent, and there's only a slight functional difference between that and using a filter in front of the node to block things like porn

THe point is that the exit policy is a decision of the exit operator
in question, not of the network as a whole. If you want to access
something you just need to find some exit that allows it.

Who should even decide what 'porn' means, or do you expect each
exit operator to maintain his own blacklist?

> The very idea of Tor is based on moral convictions (e.g., that personal privacy is a good thing, that human rights violations and abuse of power are bad things, etc.). So Tor is most definitely not neutral, nor can it be--because, if it is to exist and flourish, those moral convictions must remain at its foundation.

No. The underlying conviction of tor is that communication shall be free,
not censored. Besides there is pretty little whose transport via a
network should reasonably be illegal.

> One cannot on the one hand claim that human rights violations are "wrong" while on the other hand claiming that pornography (especially child porn) is "right." If one wants further proof that Tor has a moral component, one has only to visit http://www.torproject.org, click the "About Tor" link, and notice the discussion points. I doubt that anyone could convince the Tor team to add "...for unfettered access to pornography..." as a bullet point under "Why we need Tor."

No. But if you want to ensure unfettered access to X, that necessarily
implies unfettered access ot Y, for any values of X and Y. Any mean to
disable access to Y implies that the tor network can be forced as well
to disable access to X.

> The Tor devs go to great lengths to try to keep "evil" governments from using Tor against itself. Why not devote some effort toward keeping "evil" traffic off of Tor? Given the fact that "we need more relays" is the common mantra, it seems to me that if the Tor community could come up with a technical answer to address at least some of the most egregious abuses of Tor--things like child porn, or even porn in general, that either have nothing to do with Tor's foundational mission, or (like child porn) are antithetical to it--the result would be greater public support for the technology, and a wider deployment base.

What do you think how long it takes, when we block X, we start getting
requests (or worse, think NSL) to block Y. The moment tor gets a global
block list I will pull the plug on my relays.

Besides: You didn't mention any idea how to actually find and enumerate
the things you apparently want to block. Or how not to overblock. There
isn't even a government entity that has this problem solved.

Andreas

-- 
"Totally trivial. Famous last words."
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@*.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:21 -0800
_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays