To All,
Seems like none of us have the time to research these events or those before. If people can't play by written and unwritten rules regarding Tor contact info, family members, etc. and they 'could' be a danger to anonymity, why does Tor bother with them? If people are sincere about helping the Tor network, they will express that in their offers--otherwise, as in this situation, they should be removed until sufficient information is provided.
Arisbe
| Subject: | [tor-relays] 2017-06-07 15:37: 65 new tor exits in 30 minutes |
|---|---|
| Date: | Wed, 07 Jun 2017 19:41:00 +0000 |
| From: | nusenu <nusenu-lists@riseup.net> |
| Reply-To: | tor-relays@lists.torproject.org |
| To: | tor-relays@lists.torproject.org |
DocTor [1] made me look into this.
_All_ 65 relays in the following table have the following characteristics:
(not shown in the table to safe some space)
- OS: Linux
- run two instances per IP address (the number of relays is only odd
because in one case they created 3 keys per IP)
- ORPort: random
- DirPort: disabled
- Tor Version: 0.2.9.10
- ContactInfo: None
- MyFamily: None
- Joined the Tor network between 2017-06-07 15:37:32 and 2017-06-07
16:08:54 (UTC)
- Exit Policy summary: {u'reject': [u'25', u'119', u'135-139', u'445',
u'563', u'1214', u'4661-4666', u'6346-6429', u'6699', u'6881-6999']}
- table is sorted by colmns 3,1,2 (in that order)
- Group diversity:
- 20 distinct autonomous systems
- 18 distinct countries
https://gist.githubusercontent.com/nusenu/81337aed747ea5c7dec57899b0e27e94/raw/c7e0c4538e4f424b4cc529f3c2b1cabf6a5df579/2017-06-07_tor_network_65_relays_group.txt
Relay fingerprints are at the bottom of this file.
This list of relays is NOT identical to the one from DocTor (even though
the number is identical (65)):
[1]
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-consensus-health/2017-June/007968.html
https://twitter.com/nusenu_/status/872536564647198720
--
https://mastodon.social/@nusenu
https://twitter.com/nusenu_