If its an exit just use the reduced reduced exit policy - I dont get any abuse complaints apart from those heroes at webiron
Cheers Mark B Snaptor.co.uk (non commercial)
On 14 Mar 2017, at 14:36, Juuso Lapinlampi wub@partyvan.eu wrote:
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 02:17:14PM +0100, Moritz Bartl wrote: about it" might not be the best argument here either: I suggest you block the destination IP address(es) for some weeks via ExitPolicy, let
My concern with this is the liability on operator. In Finland (and Europe?), the limited liability provisions have three criteria for service/network providers (Tietoyhteiskuntakaari 7.11.2014/917, 182 ยง Vastuuvapaus tiedonsiirto- ja verkkoyhteyspalveluissa):
- You're not the one initiating the network transfer;
- You're not selecting the recipient; and
- You don't select or modify the data to be transferred.
I believe FICORA has advised blocking ports as necessary for security reasons (e.g. port 25) is fine, but when it's being extended to IP-address and/or port combinations, that's where it starts becoming gray (in regards to #2).
So far, replying to every abuse complaint and giving advice how to block Tor using DNSBL or similar has worked for me. I can see it's probably not what original poster's ISP would like to hear to have the issue resolved, but it's less ambiguous on law and limited liability. Thus, I suggested looking into other more friendly ISPs. _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays