Re: Is "gatereloaded" a Bad Exit?

[Scott Bennett <bennett@xxxxxxxxxx>]

     On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:09:51 +0100 Olaf Selke <olaf.selke@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>On 31.01.2011 10:52, morphium wrote:
>> 
>> As I stated above, it's not a good idea to BadExit them, because it
>> puts more load on the servers, that DO support https i.e. - and makes
>> them slower.
>
>I disagree Morphium's position mainly for the same reasons Mike and Jake
>already pointed out. If the operators really care about their nodes
>they'll certainly contact Tor admins. Damaging Tor's reputation in the
>public due to exit sniffing imo is much more worse than loosing some
>bandwidth.

     I think Mike's and Jake's implied claims of clairvoyance regarding
an exit node operator's intentions in writing the exit policy for his/her
node call for some supporting evidence.  Instead, one of them has already
admitted that they have no evidence because they have no way to detect any.
>
>> And I don't see ANY point in BadExit'ing 5 "random" Nodes, suggesting
>> that no one could capture your unencrypted traffic now.
>
>those five high bandwidth nodes with suspicious exit policies haven't
>been chosen randomly.
>
     Olaf, you run four high-capacity exit nodes, each of which allows
unencrypted exits.  You have a longstanding capacity record, so it wouldn't
be random at all to choose to flag your nodes as bad exits; rather, it would
simply be recognizing that you have the ability to sniff a significant portion
of all unencrypted exit traffic.  To avoid having your four nodes flagged as
bad exits, perhaps you should block port 80 and all the thousands of other
ports that are usually unencrypted.
     Now, you might point out that Mike's criterion for avoiding BadExit
flagging is that you can continue to do your sniffing of unencrypted exit
traffic, provided you also allow encrypted exits on a handful of ports.
     This is all silliness.  The tor project until very lately has always
promoted end user understanding and responsibility.  Now the project *appears*
to be undergoing a major philosophical change toward nannying the tor user
community, a direction I find very unappealing, to say the least.  Horrifying
might be a more appropriate word.


                                  Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**********************************************************************
* Internet:       bennett at cs.niu.edu                              *
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
* "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good  *
* objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
* -- a standing army."                                               *
*    -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790         *
**********************************************************************
***********************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe or-talk    in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/