Delivery-Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 12:01:50 -0400
Return-Path: <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on moria.seul.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,T_DKIM_INVALID,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD,
	URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Original-To: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-To: archiver@seul.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (eugeni.torproject.org [38.229.72.13])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by khazad-dum.seul.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D73401E068B
	for <archiver@seul.org>; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 12:01:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A295341AC;
	Tue, 17 Mar 2015 16:01:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7764B341A7
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 16:01:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at 
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (eugeni.torproject.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id VPL2Pk3zPPFc for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Tue, 17 Mar 2015 16:01:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ig0-x236.google.com (mail-ig0-x236.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::236])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5597733F89
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 16:01:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by igbue6 with SMTP id ue6so16355937igb.1
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 09:01:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
 :content-type; bh=7fyGUqDsG1fVMeTdsCOU7oeFF2WjPRIIE2whfbHky2I=;
 b=EzLqZU0QIMi0s3sPROMey19wEeEAjqQsBXHDRVHSz6QSsT6tl1zxKstWK/Ys463Yix
 ffT6VhoR6qqz2jPSXCGcbrkPY/P7qFlojIhpbAEU9zptvrkWh3kviG+XmMpHE4hNIUrE
 UZ3+x9hrkt22J0xaNFYduTynLOX56DPus/rm4KpbOW3wryUOKBfj+Hbebvw5g1eN0Oyt
 yfYm9/Uq0U39GSiCvYTc/KlU0orym8TqBmWeEKwtioRS+wVNgWC2NoHSspnU0UXZSGwS
 0EhfciU1NAElvCo108ISd2GluwAJZ7AlCQ27v0qkgeIon+zxIIRS0Y4WbMQk5oXe9djX
 shWQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.138.88 with SMTP id m85mr74635175iod.35.1426608095104;
 Tue, 17 Mar 2015 09:01:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.131.144 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 09:01:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <b6cb75245c0c0ec46b713575b96647e1@openmailbox.org>
References: <b6cb75245c0c0ec46b713575b96647e1@openmailbox.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 12:01:35 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJ8P3RC-_pD4S-kj_V5OmSZPCSEtt18CuMkVFp=DCjnVqre0+Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Chris Patti <cpatti@gmail.com>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Are webmail providers biased against Tor?
X-BeenThere: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
List-Id: "all discussion about theory, design,
 and development of Onion Routing" <tor-talk.lists.torproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/>
List-Post: <mailto:tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org
Sender: "tor-talk" <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>

They're 'biased' against Tor and other anonymizers for a very simple
reason - people abuse them.

In my brief career as a Tor exit relay operator, I had someone use my
exit to hijack Gmail accounts.

So, honestly, I can't blame them.  When something is *repeatedly*
identified to be a source of bad actors, it's incumbent upon those
providers to do something about it.

IMO Google's response - trying to balance a desire to enable genuine
users to use Tor while barring the bad actors, is commendable.

It's a tough problem folks, we should all recognize that.

Just my $.02.

-Chris

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 6:52 AM,  <blobby@openmailbox.org> wrote:
> I have noticed that when I try to login to my Gmail or Hotmail accounts with
> Tor, I invariably get asked to validate myself (e.g. receive an SMS). This
> is understandably due my IP being in a different country from the "usual"
> IPs that I use to sign in.
>
> However, I have experimented with StrictExitNodes. I am in New York and have
> used a number of New York exit nodes. I still get asked to verify.
>
> I am wondering if Tor developers or experienced users know (for a fact)
> whether or not this is "normal" or whether using an exit node automatically
> makes Gmail and Hotmail think that a "hacker" is attempting to access the
> accounts.
>
> This is not a case of a website e.g. Craigslist blocking Tor. It is whether
> the use of an exit node IP automatically engenders scrutiny from whatever
> security algorithms certain webmail providers use.
>
>
> --
> tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
> To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk



-- 
Christopher Patti - Geek At Large | GTalk: cpatti@gmail.com | AIM:
chrisfeohpatti | P: (260) 54PATTI
"Technology challenges art, art inspires technology." - John Lasseter, Pixar
-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

