On 06.10.16 14:29, Mirimir wrote:
What matters for "complaining parties" is that they're getting crap from some exit relay. So they complain.
Sure, and I don't have a problem with that. If I get complaints, I tell the CP about Tor, and point them to the relevant information. All good until that point.
Just telling complainers to block Tor exits may resolve your issues, but it creates others.
It is a question of perspective. I don't have issues with a percentage of "bad traffic" passing through my exits. I have come to accept this as a unfortunate but necessary downside of how Tor works. The majority is "good traffic", and that's why I -- like others -- support Tor in the first place. I would not dream of removing ports 80 or 443 from my exit policies just because some malicious clients are trying to break into WordPress installations.
Arguably, it's the complainers that should be implementing IPS and/or other measures that block whatever they don't like.
Quite so. If somebody places a server on the Internet, he accepts public access. That includes the necessity to deal with "bad traffic" in one way or other. Complaining to a Tor exit operator with "you are doing a bad thing" is factually incorrect. I willingly help CPs if they show an interest, because that is polite and helps the Tor project. However, under national law, I do not have an obligation to block traffic until a court tells me to. Obviously I have no interest in lawsuits and prefer talking to people to find a solution. I just don't jump because some CP says "hop". ;-)
-Ralph