Re: [tor-talk] Comcast Residential - terms of service

[Gregg Nicholas <jolted1@xxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, I was configured as an exit node with default outgoing ports.  Incoming ports were 80 and 443.

I'm not really serious about rejecting connections from the United States.  I'm sure that technique wouldn't prevent Comcast from figuring out that I was running a TOR node.  Just might slow them down a little.

It's frustrating when the only ISP that offers broadband service decides that TOR is against their terms of service.  (DSL is too slow to be considered as 'broadband' in our area).  In my opinion, it's time to regulate ISPs.  Just provide a connection.  Don't interfere with my traffic - and don't monitor it either. (I know it will never happen)

Even though I agree with the ideals of the TOR project, I'm not going to spend an extra $12 a month to run a node.

---

From: Andrew Lewman <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Comcast Residential - terms of service

On Monday, October 10, 2011 13:02:12 Gregg Nicholas wrote:
> I wanted to support the idea of free speech for people in
> repressed countries.  However, shortly
> after installing TOR, Comcast threatened to force me to a business account
> (extra $12/month).  So, I've killed my
> node.  Still don't know if Comcast will force some penalty on me. I'd
> switch to another broadband provider - if there was one.  (around here,
> DSL is too slow to be counted as broadband)

Was this an exit node or not?

> Has anyone considered an option to drop client
> connections from the United States? 

We're not going to censor Tor.

--
Andrew
pgp 0x74ED336B
_______________________________________________
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

_______________________________________________
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk