On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 10:23:54PM +0200, kantorkel@hamburg.freifunk.net wrote:
Hey.
Hello,
Am 6/9/21 um 9:51 PM schrieb Andreas Kempe:
We have this page with some tips: https://community.torproject.org/relay/community-resources/tor-relay-univers...
I read through the page before mailing the list and I especially appreciate the template letter from EFF. I am hoping that a system of standardised response e-mails can be realised to lessen the burden of handling complaints. Maybe with some degree of automation?
That is totally possible. At Artikel10 (https://artikel10.org/), we use Zammad to realize some degree of automation. We ignore some mails, some receive our standard reply.
Thank you for the suggestion. We'll have a look.
Here's a project that other members of our community have used in the past and that you could adapt for your university: https://www.overleaf.com/project/541e42eddb749944790bd16d
And as Matthias said, you can find more relays outside .EDU, for example, this non-exit node hosted by our friends in University of Campinas, in Brazil: https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/1E7BDE03151AAB779CB4AFEAEEA52...
Here you find our experiences from running Tor exits at two German universities: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.04277
I got this shared off-list and was asked to not spread it since it wasn't yet uploaded to arxiv. Good to see that it is now made public. Having a fresh example like this is great!
I don't think running a non-exit node would be an issue since they won't generate nearly as much abuse. I have considered looking at running normal nodes or possibly bridges if we hit a wall regarding exit nodes.
(My relay at university is a low-bandwidth relay but...) If abuse is an issue, you could allow fewer ports or even ports 80, 443 only. In the past months, most abuse mails that I received were about port 22.
Yes, we were planning to run with a reduced exit policy and I'm pretty sure that the IT department will have opinions about it as well if we get to run a relay.
Cordially, Andreas Kempe