It makes me happy but alas it was forwarded to me by the provider and didn't include an email address... so now I can not reply, SIGH Question: this has come from port 22 usage - how important is this port to the general population? Thoughts... Regards, Paul
I created a new Exit some days ago and only allowed Ports 53, 80, 443 for Exit. Last Provider shut down my Exit because of many complaints.
Am 11.10.2017 um 11:38 schrieb Paul Templeton <paul@coffswifi.net>:
It makes me happy but alas it was forwarded to me by the provider and didn't include an email address... so now I can not reply, SIGH
Question: this has come from port 22 usage - how important is this port to the general population? Thoughts...
Regards,
Paul
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 09:38:22 +0000 (UTC) Paul Templeton <paul@coffswifi.net> wrote:
It makes me happy but alas it was forwarded to me by the provider and didn't include an email address... so now I can not reply, SIGH
I believe in such case you are supposed to reply to your provider, usually to indicate that the problem the abuse report relates to "has been dealt with" and will not repeat. In case of a Tor Exit you cannot guarantee that, aside from removing port 22 from your exit policy.
Question: this has come from port 22 usage - how important is this port to the general population? Thoughts...
There was a mini discussion recently on that, with the general consensus seeming to be that keeping it open is more trouble than it's worth. https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2017-October/013188.html -- With respect, Roman
Thanks Roman,
I believe in such case you are supposed to reply to your provider I will
There was a mini discussion recently on that, with the general consensus seeming to be that keeping it open is more trouble than it's worth. https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2017-October/013188.html I'll drop port 22
Regards, Paul
Hi Paul, On 11/10/2017 13:28, Paul Templeton wrote:
I believe in such case you are supposed to reply to your provider I will
For my experience, I do the same.
There was a mini discussion recently on that, with the general consensus seeming to be that keeping it open is more trouble than it's worth. https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2017-October/013188.html I'll drop port 22
You may be interested in these Reduced Exit Policies: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ReducedExitPolicy there are several of them which are progressively strictest and stricter. Cristian
So far I have had no abuse emails or complaints after two months on a new server, using the longer suggested reduced policy list, but I do exclude 80, which seems safer but limits the role as an exit. But 443 open. I closed other potential abuse ports such as 22, 8080, 5900. It's not the complaints that worry me, but the reaction of the ISP with any complaints, so best avoided until I can afford to be my own ISP. What are the risks of abuse reports in opening up a wide range of high port numbers as an exit say 20,000-50,000? Gerry -----Original Message----- From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-bounces@lists.torproject.org] On Behalf Of Cristian Consonni Sent: 12 October 2017 11:10 To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Just got my first Abuse email :-) Hi Paul, On 11/10/2017 13:28, Paul Templeton wrote:
I believe in such case you are supposed to reply to your provider I will
For my experience, I do the same.
There was a mini discussion recently on that, with the general consensus seeming to be that keeping it open is more trouble than it's worth. https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2017-October/013188 .html I'll drop port 22
You may be interested in these Reduced Exit Policies: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ReducedExitPolicy there are several of them which are progressively strictest and stricter. Cristian _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Hello, I will suggest to first reply to the abuse email, rather than using a reduced exit policy. Many times ISPs or abuse email senders (even in automated abuse emails) are happy with any response that they can show to their upstream provider or abuse reporter. Dr Gerard Bulger:
So far I have had no abuse emails or complaints after two months on a new server, using the longer suggested reduced policy list, but I do exclude 80, which seems safer but limits the role as an exit. But 443 open. I closed other potential abuse ports such as 22, 8080, 5900.
It's not the complaints that worry me, but the reaction of the ISP with any complaints, so best avoided until I can afford to be my own ISP.
What are the risks of abuse reports in opening up a wide range of high port numbers as an exit say 20,000-50,000?
From: 'https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ReducedExitPolicy' "Since bittorrent clients can be run on any port, and most of them pick random ports, every port you add to your exit policy increases the probability of a bittorrent client using your exit node to connect to a monitored peer that is listening on that port. This means that enabling ranges of ports is especially bad, unfortunately. Each new port adds 1/65535 (or even more if eg. the port numbers listen below are preferred to use for torrent traffic b/c they are well known now) to your risk of getting DMCA takedowns. The privileged ports (1-1024) have a smaller risk of getting DMCA takedowns." Also have a look at the IANA registered ports: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_TCP_and_UDP_port_numbers#Registered_po... ~Vasilis -- Fingerprint: 8FD5 CF5F 39FC 03EB B382 7470 5FBF 70B1 D126 0162 Pubkey: https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x5FBF70B1D1260162
participants (6)
-
Cristian Consonni -
Dr Gerard Bulger -
Paul Templeton -
Roman Mamedov -
Vasilis -
Volker Mink