[tor-talk] Tor and Google error / CAPTCHAs.

[blobby at openmailbox.org]

On 2016-10-02 22:33, Alec Muffett wrote:

> So:
> 
> - person uses tor to connect to socks proxy provider
> - person authenticates (?) to socks proxy provider
> - person traverses socks proxy prover to connect to end service
> 
> This sound like putting a condom on top of another condom after cutting 
> a
> hole in the first one, but hey, if you think it's worthwhile and fun, 
> knock
> yourself out. :-)
> 
> 
> The problem is that the SOCKS IP itself may be "bad" (perhaps even as 
> "bad"
>> as an exit node IP) and hence Gmail, FB, etc, still discriminate (and 
>> hence
>> demand additional proof).
>> 
> 
> Also that.  Basically you are just shifting (say) Google's knowledge of
> what IP address from
> 
>     "possibly a Tor user, amongst all the spam that Tor emanates"
> 
> to:
> 
>     "traffic sourced from some shitty open (or authenticated?) random 
> SOCKS
> relay, who know what the fuck this is?"

But a point might be: tor exit nodes are public but SOCKS proxies are 
not. Unless you tell me otherwise, I don't think there are centralized 
databases of SOCKS proxies.

Now my suspicion is that you will say: not the point. People will be 
messing around with said SOCKS proxies (the aforementioned scraping for 
example) and hence it's irrelevant whether there's an accessible record 
that said IP is a SOCKS proxy. Yes?

Just one more point: one can use http://www.ip-score.com/ to check 
whether an IP is on any blacklists. I've occasionally found proxies that 
are 100% clean. Yet still I get asked for a CAPTCHA when using them. 
This is, I suspect, because http://www.ip-score.com/ focuses on 
blacklists used for spam (e.g. those checked by mail servers) rather 
than looking at any kind of web-based "badness" e.g. scraping. Hence an 
IP that may have a perfect mail spam score (no blacklists) doesn't 
preclude said IP having a high level of badness for non-mail spam 
activity.


> 
> In short, you're making <COMPANY'S> job of picking out good traffic 
> from
> bad, _way_ harder.
> 
> But, hey, maybe you're masochistic / sadistic / both?  :-)
> 

You mean Venus in Furs versus the 120 Days of Sodom? :-)


> 
> --
> http://dropsafe.crypticide.com/aboutalecm