Shutdown of my digital ocean guard relay
Hi Guys I today received notification from DO that they have changed their Terms of Service and Acceptable Useage policies. Having read those changed notices it is clear to me that DO are no longer really Tor friendly. They do not allow exits and whilst my guard relay there (at roof.rlogin.net with fingerprint EA8637EA746451C0680559FDFF34ABA54DDAE831) has been running for nearly seven years I can no longer do that because of the likely bandwidth charges in future. My DO relay has been using around 12 TiB per month for some time now and I could afford to let it run because I was a "legacy" customer (i.e. early adopter of DO services who was given "free bandwidth forever"). It looks to me from their new ToS that I will no longer enjoy that status after 22 October. So I have shut it down. Any other relay operator using DO services should read their new ToS (1) and AUP (2) and decide for themselves whether they will be affected. My other guard relay at sink.rlogin.net on Hetzner's network will continue in operation. Mick (1) https://www.digitalocean.com/legal/terms-of-service-agreement/ (2) https://www.digitalocean.com/legal/acceptable-use-policy/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 https://baldric.net/about-trivia ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not run it until they spot it and shut it down?! -----Original Message----- From: tor-relays <tor-relays-bounces@lists.torproject.org> On Behalf Of mick Sent: 15 October 2020 11:42 To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org Subject: [tor-relays] Shutdown of my digital ocean guard relay Hi Guys I today received notification from DO that they have changed their Terms of Service and Acceptable Useage policies. Having read those changed notices it is clear to me that DO are no longer really Tor friendly. They do not allow exits and whilst my guard relay there (at roof.rlogin.net with fingerprint EA8637EA746451C0680559FDFF34ABA54DDAE831) has been running for nearly seven years I can no longer do that because of the likely bandwidth charges in future. My DO relay has been using around 12 TiB per month for some time now and I could afford to let it run because I was a "legacy" customer (i.e. early adopter of DO services who was given "free bandwidth forever"). It looks to me from their new ToS that I will no longer enjoy that status after 22 October. So I have shut it down. Any other relay operator using DO services should read their new ToS (1) and AUP (2) and decide for themselves whether they will be affected. My other guard relay at sink.rlogin.net on Hetzner's network will continue in operation. Mick (1) https://www.digitalocean.com/legal/terms-of-service-agreement/ (2) https://www.digitalocean.com/legal/acceptable-use-policy/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 https://baldric.net/about-trivia --------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 13:09:49 +0100 "Dr Gerard Bulger" <gerard@bulger.co.uk> allegedly wrote:
Why not run it until they spot it and shut it down?!
Because the last time they changed the rules (when they introduced charging for bandwidth) I got hit (automatically) with a big bandwidth charge despite having been told that I would have "free bandwidth for life". Back then I argued (successfully) that "for life" meant just that. This time they have explicitly said that people in my position will no longer get free bandwidth if we give it away (e.g. to Tor users). So I shut it down before the automated charge kicks in. Mick --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 https://baldric.net/about-trivia ---------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2020-10-15 10:24, mick wrote:
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 13:09:49 +0100 "Dr Gerard Bulger" <gerard@bulger.co.uk> allegedly wrote:
Why not run it until they spot it and shut it down?!
Because the last time they changed the rules (when they introduced charging for bandwidth) I got hit (automatically) with a big bandwidth charge despite having been told that I would have "free bandwidth for life".
Back then I argued (successfully) that "for life" meant just that. This time they have explicitly said that people in my position will no longer get free bandwidth if we give it away (e.g. to Tor users).
So I shut it down before the automated charge kicks in.
Mick
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 https://baldric.net/about-trivia ---------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays Do you plan on hosting else where mental note to not use DO for TOR. Although i just use my own server for tor now. I also provide hosting but it cost more then DO.
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:54:38 -0400 postmaster@coolcomputers.info allegedly wrote:
Do you plan on hosting else where mental note to not use DO for TOR. Although i just use my own server for tor now. I also provide hosting but it cost more then DO.
Yes, I will look elewhere. DO are /very/ expensive in terms of bandwidth if you go over their 1TB limit. Mick --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 https://baldric.net/about-trivia ---------------------------------------------------------------------
On 15.10.2020 16:24, mick wrote:
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 13:09:49 +0100 "Dr Gerard Bulger" <gerard@bulger.co.uk> allegedly wrote:
Why not run it until they spot it and shut it down?!
Because the last time they changed the rules (when they introduced charging for bandwidth) I got hit (automatically) with a big bandwidth charge despite having been told that I would have "free bandwidth for life".
Back then I argued (successfully) that "for life" meant just that. This time they have explicitly said that people in my position will no longer get free bandwidth if we give it away (e.g. to Tor users).
So I shut it down before the automated charge kicks in.
Perhaps it helps to use port 80 and 443 or run as a bridge with obfs4. If you want to operate a stress-free exit, take a look at frantec. A 4Gb KVM has unlimited bandwidth and if you stick to the AUP, Francisco and staff will even take care of the abuse mails. https://buyvm.net/acceptable-use-policy/ Unfortunately, they are mostly sold out. At the beginning of the month there is usually something free. They also have nice IRC support. Servdiscount has a 15% discount this month¹. There I have the Supermicro SD-SM-3365 with KVM Remote Management. But they don't allow exit. https://servdiscount.com/ ¹15% discount is forever. -- ╰_╯ Ciao Marco! Debian GNU/Linux It's free software and it gives you freedom!
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 20:05:03 +0200 lists@for-privacy.net allegedly wrote:
If you want to operate a stress-free exit, take a look at frantec. A 4Gb KVM has unlimited bandwidth and if you stick to the AUP, Francisco and staff will even take care of the abuse mails. https://buyvm.net/acceptable-use-policy/ Unfortunately, they are mostly sold out. At the beginning of the month there is usually something free. They also have nice IRC support.
Servdiscount has a 15% discount this month¹. There I have the Supermicro SD-SM-3365 with KVM Remote Management. But they don't allow exit. https://servdiscount.com/
¹15% discount is forever.
I haven't run an exit in over 8 years - I got too much aggravation, but I will look at setting up another relay. I'll check out your recommendations. Thanks. Mick --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 https://baldric.net/about-trivia ---------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 11:41:52 +0100 mick <mbm@rlogin.net> wrote:
Hi Guys
I today received notification from DO that they have changed their Terms of Service and Acceptable Useage policies. Having read those changed notices it is clear to me that DO are no longer really Tor friendly. They do not allow exits and whilst my guard relay there (at roof.rlogin.net with fingerprint EA8637EA746451C0680559FDFF34ABA54DDAE831) has been running for nearly seven years I can no longer do that because of the likely bandwidth charges in future. My DO relay has been using around 12 TiB per month for some time now and I could afford to let it run because I was a "legacy" customer (i.e. early adopter of DO services who was given "free bandwidth forever"). It looks to me from their new ToS that I will no longer enjoy that status after 22 October. So I have shut it down.
Any other relay operator using DO services should read their new ToS (1) and AUP (2) and decide for themselves whether they will be affected.
Could you point out which change you are referring to? The point 3.7 saying that unmetered bandwidth accounts must not run "TOR" has been there since the earliest the Wayback Machine has it, from May 8th, 2018: http://web.archive.org/web/20181106225918/https://www.digitalocean.com/legal... 3.7 As a reward for being early adopters of the Services, Subscribers with grandfathered Accounts shall receive free bandwidth for the duration that such Account is operative and conducts its operations in compliance with these Terms of Service ("Grandfathered Accounts"). The free bandwidth may only be used directly by the Subscriber of such Grandfathered Account. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Subscribers of Grandfathered Accounts must NOT: (i) run Torrents for download or Seed Servers, TOR, or services that include content of an adult or pornographic nature; (ii) resell services through their Account to provide free bandwidth to other individuals; or (iii) transfer the Account ownership to another individual or entity, or otherwise circumvent the intended fair usage of free bandwidth by distributing it freely to others. Failure of Subscribers of Grandfathered Accounts to follow these terms will result in the revocation of their Accounts' grandfathered status.
My other guard relay at sink.rlogin.net on Hetzner's network will continue in operation.
Mick
(1) https://www.digitalocean.com/legal/terms-of-service-agreement/
(2) https://www.digitalocean.com/legal/acceptable-use-policy/
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 https://baldric.net/about-trivia ---------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
-- With respect, Roman
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:27:43 +0500 Roman Mamedov <rm@romanrm.net> allegedly wrote:
Could you point out which change you are referring to? The point 3.7 saying that unmetered bandwidth accounts must not run "TOR" has been there since the earliest the Wayback Machine has it, from May 8th, 2018:
Hi Roman The new ToS says: "5.6 As a reward for being early adopters of the Services, some Users with older Accounts received free bandwidth promotions contingent on their Accounts remaining operative, in good standing, and in compliance with this TOS ("Free Bandwidth Accounts"). Free Bandwidth Accounts will no longer receive free bandwidth if: (a) such Accounts are transferred in ownership to third party; (b) such Free Bandwidth Accounts are used in violation of this TOS (including the AUP); or (c) such Free Bandwidth Accounts are used in connection with any of the following activities: (i) run Torrents for download or Seed Servers, TOR, or services that include content of an adult or pornographic nature; (ii) resell or otherwise offer as a service such free bandwidth to third parties; or (iii) otherwise circumvent or attempt to circumvent the intended use of Free Bandwidth Accounts by redistributing the benefits of free bandwidth to third parties." Several things there tell me that Grandfathered accounts will be dropped (or charged heavily) if they continue to run Tor. The use of the past tense in "Accounts received free bandwidth". The statement that such accounts will "no longer receive free bandwidth if:" and then there is an explicit reference to Tor as well as references to "offering free bandwidth to third parties" and "redistributing the benefits of free bandwidth to third parties". That looks like weasel legal wording to allow DO to charge heavily because I "offer free bandwidth to others" through Tor. All in all it looks as if DO no longer want Tor relays on their network. So I'll look elsewhere. I already have a relay at Hetzner, but I'm aware that they (along with OVH and currently DO) are overrepresented and it would be better to find alternatives. Best Mick --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 https://baldric.net/about-trivia ---------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:20:02 +0100 mick <mbm@rlogin.net> wrote:
The new ToS says:
"5.6 As a reward for being early adopters of the Services, some Users with older Accounts received free bandwidth promotions contingent on their Accounts remaining operative, in good standing, and in compliance with this TOS ("Free Bandwidth Accounts"). Free Bandwidth Accounts will no longer receive free bandwidth if: (a) such Accounts are transferred in ownership to third party; (b) such Free Bandwidth Accounts are used in violation of this TOS (including the AUP); or (c) such Free Bandwidth Accounts are used in connection with any of the following activities: (i) run Torrents for download or Seed Servers, TOR, or services that include content of an adult or pornographic nature; (ii) resell or otherwise offer as a service such free bandwidth to third parties; or (iii) otherwise circumvent or attempt to circumvent the intended use of Free Bandwidth Accounts by redistributing the benefits of free bandwidth to third parties."
Several things there tell me that Grandfathered accounts will be dropped (or charged heavily) if they continue to run Tor.
I don't see much significant change compared to the 2018 version. But of course even per ToS from back then, you were forbidden to run Tor during all this time. So not a bad idea to stop, even if "late" (and still before getting into any trouble).
The use of the past tense in "Accounts received free bandwidth". The statement that such accounts will "no longer receive free bandwidth if:" and then there is an explicit reference to Tor as well as references to "offering free bandwidth to third parties" and "redistributing the benefits of free bandwidth to third parties".
That looks like weasel legal wording to allow DO to charge heavily because I "offer free bandwidth to others" through Tor.
All in all it looks as if DO no longer want Tor relays on their network.
Generally speaking, no provider "wants" 24x7 heavy bandwidth users in their network, who are attracted by the cheap unmetered plans and pay the same as others using two orders of magnitude less. Many will just tolerate them while it doesn't cause too many problems. -- With respect, Roman
participants (6)
-
Dr Gerard Bulger -
lists＠for-privacy.net -
Matthew Smith -
mick -
postmaster＠coolcomputers.info -
Roman Mamedov