[tor-relays] Can you double check my exit policy for usefulness while minimizing complaints

[Mike Perry]

Thus spake Nate Homier (tor at universal-mechanism.org):

> I was wondering if I have a good compromise between not allowing
> BitTorrent and allowing enough ports to be useful.  Here's mine.

I think the better question is "Why do you think you should remove the
ports you removed from the ReducedExitPolicy?"

If you can't answer that question, you should just use the
ReducedExitPolicy.

> How does this compare with this policy located here:
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ReducedExitPolicy
> 
> Should I use the official Tor reduced policy or is mine good enough to
> be useful while minimizing complaints.

If you're already going to run an exit, it is best to be as permissive
as possible. It is a bad idea arbitrarily restrict the apps that people
can use Tor for without very good reason. 

After you remove bittorrent, most of the abuse mail you'll get will be
due to 80 and 443 anyway. There are also technical reasons to avoid
having 1000 slightly different versions of the reduced exit policy.

Hence the reduced policy allows every app port that we could find in
use, *except* bittorrent.


-- 
Mike Perry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20130409/83f6cc32/attachment.pgp>