Delivery-Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 18:01:41 -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=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY
	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 1DD351E0B98;
	Tue, 16 Sep 2014 18:01:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 534CF260FA;
	Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:01:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E687625B25
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:01:32 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eugeni.torproject.org
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 mWaaR52iYEgd for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:01:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mx1.riseup.net (mx1.riseup.net [198.252.153.129])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "Gandi Standard SSL CA" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF5CD25862
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:01:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from plantcutter.riseup.net (plantcutter-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.121])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "Gandi Standard SSL CA" (not verified))
 by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79C0A53856
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 15:01:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak;
 t=1410904888; bh=w4IzENTLrvdSlOoryZrHUzFBaywuXSniGTPqM+uwkY4=;
 h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From;
 b=i++mCZ7cctiMQI3Aia8hEbjhPjh8Se9iI6OsqyQ0Nk5nopbYueP4+/2ZpeF67kRNw
 DKyFc8yKhZoKABd62oZb7sxTidSZ4ZiGpUQW9kH6n9r4/TFPmRlZcMC4Or95s5QtRv
 eB2vLtfs/6rV/ajKM9rcdPbeNP8GNIGTMGl/ELtw=
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (Authenticated sender: obx)
 with ESMTPSA id ADD781FEBC
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:01:43 +0000
From: obx <obx@riseup.net>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
Message-ID: <20140916220143.GN32501@badger>
References: <20140916205533.GL32501@badger>
 <5418A597.1030901@riseup.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5418A597.1030901@riseup.net>
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.4 at mx1
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Don't use sectoor
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>

Sectoor is no ISP. They run a DNSBL. Sorry if my message has been
unclear.

The problem is, that the /24 of the ISP hosting my tor-exit has been
banned as tor-exit, regardless that I'm the only tor-exit on that
network. This is disrupting IRC and mail traffic. I assume this might
have happened to quite a few /24's out there.

*If* sectoor would be an ISP I wouldn't complain. But disrupting the
service of innocent neighbors that just happen to have a similar IP
address is irresponsible.

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 10:03:19PM +0100, Thomas White wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Note: I have excluded sectoor.de from this message
> 
> Public shaming of companies does work, there is a good/bad ISP list
> below which can always be subtlely mentioned when communicating with ISPs:
> 
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/GoodBadISPs
> 
> However, I think it is a step in the wrong direction to start publicly
> bring a support email into the public domain without discussing it
> privately first. In addition, you didn't link this "public
> information" part in your email to them. The problem of ISPs usually
> is not that they don't like Tor, but most of the time they simply
> don't understand it and approaching like this is not going to change
> that. Instead, if this were me (and I have dealt with many, many
> companies in the past) I would approach asking if they would consider
> allowing Tor on the basis you could perhaps reach an agreement over
> handling abuse issues for example. If that didn't work, even asking if
> they would accept non-exits instead is at least a step in the right
> direction.
> 
> If they don't move from their position, then it is always open to ask
> tor-talk for assistance in convincing them or perhaps ask for advice
> on what arguments you can use in persuading them. I have even offered
> in the past (and this offer remains open btw) to assist in talking to
> ISPs to change their policy. Some methods work, some don't, but
> turning this into a you vs us scenario with an ISP won't work because
> ultimately they don't give a shit about one customer unless that one
> customer is bringing large amounts of revenue.
> 
> Regards,
> - -T
> 
> On 16/09/2014 21:55, obx wrote:
> > Dear tor-talk, Dear sectoor,
> > 
> > I'm running a tor-exit at a small provider. Another customer at the
> > same provider complained they got blacklisted by sectoor for
> > operating a tor-exit. This customer doesn't run a tor server and
> > didn't run a tor server in the past.
> > 
> > Hence, they got blacklisted as tor-exit.
> > 
> > I did some lookups and it looks like you banned the whole class C.
> > 
> > Why?
> > 
> > There's no need to "guess" since the list of tor exits is public 
> > information.
> > 
> > Please understand that is level of irresponsible management on
> > your site, sectoor, can destroy the reputation of smaller
> > providers.
> > 
> > I expect you fix this instantly.
> > 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
> 
> iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUGKWUAAoJEE2uQiaesOsLHusP/inPrHFlRBlQwCC/cmI5UqvT
> WmZWc0w3G90rVUkEGNcwcZmsFA871QnvxcYU0v66OrnynPG28Vvq+0RO3Rxhwb1e
> jbdjoZTLkzEoTZorEIaaAHXh0YBh6w/7AZvdA5mLqxku7Zd0VtRWt7l4+hd381eK
> GXv2m8KY2dXEVcN2XuWxzshzMWcqklnlXuVBTg9sFGAFf4KpTWyVbeuacyLJEakL
> /l71rbmPA7sWVTcVRyfryUyW1ugEHstuafgbZH10pSho4b/5TF2rVpg7jGtmZYkB
> nWoK0xq4oMQjqm8QX1rVC+oaz//mfCY1Zevht06Gl7hxxHja7Hzf0wc6yS63uQGM
> eJlNIV1bBRo/pQ80fxwSDj7DFnbse1bpOwqN53ZziOy/ybXdBbGI2LQqyKe5eSVt
> aL9ufTxfkvXvJ6vgBMvqYXPRXMErWdQVmW9pHyJDl64wTANqyQ5DdF/9uBwpfYBA
> LFN4n5VbFNX24l0qiBrzWvNxogav4mGWvCGN058g8Ld7shusAQMcVe3vowOoETyJ
> HbyqKqL9hdK7UqS7FBbV3PVcf2yx77tYjH3z97NmDLY525xnd2hTHZHnCZBMJJBy
> gbWT3Na4AE85xpzG9rsNuWAI85pKtG9fM2NwV380oAWJ+cwU59zQQITnK8eSlHEE
> uY9VcXsRsdb5sT3yE/Xi
> =o3xP
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> -- 
> 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
-- 
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

