Delivery-Date: Wed, 06 May 2015 07:19:19 -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=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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 A58DD1E0AA9
	for <archiver@seul.org>; Wed,  6 May 2015 07:19:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 167113528C;
	Wed,  6 May 2015 11:19:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECA2F35284
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Wed,  6 May 2015 11:19:10 +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 rL8NFePDr03H for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Wed,  6 May 2015 11:19:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp5.hushmail.com (smtp5.hushmail.com [65.39.178.142])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.hushmail.com", Issuer "smtp.hushmail.com" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1CCD351B0
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Wed,  6 May 2015 11:19:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp5.hushmail.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp5.hushmail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B9BC360244
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Wed,  6 May 2015 11:19:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.hushmail.com (w2.hushmail.com [65.39.178.46])
 by smtp5.hushmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Wed,  6 May 2015 11:19:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by smtp.hushmail.com (Postfix, from userid 99)
 id A9834E04BF; Wed,  6 May 2015 11:19:07 +0000 (UTC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 06 May 2015 07:19:07 -0400
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
From: "l.m" <ter.one.leeboi@hush.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJVRA1RcFx4_FVkhws2y1f+GTNPZuf8WEyo6EMYa86vm=jQHzg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5548D4B4.9040303@rwth-aachen.de>
 <20150505155135.GD7800@moria.seul.org>
 <20150505163624.5D57FE04BF@smtp.hushmail.com>
 <5548F685.2090704@openmailbox.org>
 <20150505170747.61F8BE04BF@smtp.hushmail.com>
 <CAJVRA1RcFx4_FVkhws2y1f+GTNPZuf8WEyo6EMYa86vm=jQHzg@mail.gmail.com> 
Message-Id: <20150506111907.A9834E04BF@smtp.hushmail.com>
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] German University signs up 24 tor relays
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>

>relays are inherently public

Relays are a machine, an ip, a server, with a public relay descriptor.

You ISP has a similar descriptor for your CPE connected to their
infrastructure. So the ip you use is public without precaution. Does
that automatically make the association of you with that ip an
enforced public policy. Maybe for your ISP or government. Not on tor
network.

If you really want to single out operator, or researcher, for missing
some non-mandatory data, like some tor nanny, you better be prepared
for consequences. Here I thought the policy was to create advocates
not enemies. All I'm saying is if a researcher at a university
registers some relay without contact that doesn't make them suspect.
Get some proof then the discussion is a moot-point. Just because some
past event happened (US-CERT, Black Hat Conference) doesn't give you
the right to force disclosure. Don't play coy. Forcing disclosure is
exactly what happened. Don't post some blog entry about being against
harassment then stalk or harass a researcher for not being proactive
to your comfort level.

You should be grateful for their work, not self-righteous. What the
hell do you think? The university pays for the relays and doesn't have
a code of conduct for student activity using university resource? That
code of conduct somehow doesn't apply to this graduate or their
mentor? Exactly how much work have you done with a university because
it sounds like none.

That's my 2c. 

--leeroy
-- 
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

