Re: Safe destinations

[Niels Elgaard Larsen <elgaard@xxxxxxx>]

Gregory Maxwell wrote:

> How awful would it be to create a community managed list of 'safe
> destinations' distributed by the directory servers as a single object
> which exit operators could include in in their exit policies and
> further refine with local rules?

I would not like _one_ list as it could be single point of failure. E.g. someone could be
threatened or required by a court to remove a site from the white-list.

Also it could lead to discussions attacked by censorship being concentrated on a few
white-listed servers.

When there is a new development in e.g., Iran and new free-speech blogs appearing every
day, these blogs should be accessible though TOR from day one.

> Some exit operators would likely switch to safe-mode, reducing the
> total amount of universal-exit capacity but if the safe list included
> enough high traffic sites it would probably more than offset the loss
> and arguably anyone who switched was likely to quit in any case.