-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
I receive the Webiron abuse complaints too. You can opt-out of their e-mails as I personally also do not like restricting access to specific networks.
For the relays I run which are in a SWIP-ed IP range redirecting the abuse to myself I just ignore them. I do however have a few relays without IP addresses on my own name for which I did have to add a reported range to the exit policy to prevent an angry hoster.
It is up to yourself to decide what you can and want to do with it. Better have a relay which stays running but restricting access to one /24 range than have it offline as a whole.
Just my two cents.
On 7/5/15 7:21 PM, Patrick ZAJDA wrote:
Hi all,
I run a Tor exit node, and I received an abuse complain from Webiron. In this mail, I can read the following: "If you run a VPN, anonymizer service (like a TOR exit or proxy node), or business intelligence not contracted with the site owner, then we request that the targeted range be blocked from your service. If it is being blocked, then it's at the right and choice of our clients to refuse access." So if I understand correctly, they ask me to block the targeted range they give me in this report.
I know I can block this IP range by adding it to my exit policy, but I would like to know how others exit node operators manage these type of requests, because I ask myself if it is not against tor philosophy to block access to a specific network to Tor users.
Thanks all in advance for your answers.
Best regards,
- -- Tim Semeijn Babylon Network pgp 0x5B8A4DDF