New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Well thats just shell accounts where all outgoing traffic is routed through the Tor network (so that the admins won't have to deal with abuse mails)
If TOR is banned in the providers ToS, you aren't paying for it.
Indeed, but they dont want ppl that use those resources, this is why they ban services that are likely to consume what they offer.
That in itself is not a problem, the fact that they make up justifications which tarnish the reputation of a free service and its volunteers, spread lies and propaganda to hide the real reasons behind that move, well, that is The Problem.
M
Please take off your tin foil hat, you could not be more wrong, why is there not an ignore button.
The users causing abuse on Tor do that, not the providers, or maintainers of Tor. But you'll never be convinced of anything while having your head so far buried in the sand.
"ALL VPS providers oversell, it is the whole idea behind VPS, if you think otherwise, you are simply naive, or in your own words, braindead."
There is no more abuse on Tor than on any other legal service, including httpd. The ppl that want to make it look that way are those that cannot afford to host Tor because it will use the advertised BW which is, of course, much lower than the available BW.
M
Sure there is.
But to the hosters: Why exactly are you forbidding non-exit tor nodes?
Have any proof ?
They forbid it because:
1. They dont want to be part of this filthy kiddie porn, torrentz and warez sponsored by the US Navy, EFF, ACLU and others which dont know what they are doing;
2. Ppl put exit nodes because they cant read English, and, of course, cant read ToS regarding any other aspect or sign up in the first place, for that matter;/sarcasm off
3. They cant afford to provide the advertised BW.
M
It is as provable as you being a sane person
I can only speak for myself, and until recently, Tor of any kind was allowed, it is now against the ToS because of abuse, and the inability to track that abuse down. The only way to eliminate the abuse is the elimination of Tor. Now before our tin foil hat wearing resident nutjob @Maounique says otherwise with far reaching speculation about all other protocols, they are traceable, so their abuse can be limited.
EDIT: I'm sorry, you asked about non-exit nodes, and I failed to answer that part of the question. But for non-exit nodes, there is too much administration time consumed educating people the meaning of words, "Oh, I did not understand non-exit didn't mean exit"
Wow, just wow. Are you telling me that we cannot afford 100Mbps of bandwidth? Is that really to much? Our VPSs are limited to 100Mbps which is NOTHING in the real world. So your assumption that we disallow TOR because of bandwidth could not be any more wrong.
EDIT: Removed the rest because it's not worth arguing over.
Congratulations, the question has been "successfully" dodged again.
miTgiB still claims he can track CC fraudsters, wi-fi abusers, open proxies, botnet operators, w/e, KuJoe says he can afford the BW, but still fails to provide a valid reason for which a non-exit Tor is not allowed.
And yes, there is more % of P2P in the rest of the Internet than in Tor, most frauds are done with botnets and http, open anon proxies, phishing and spam, Freenet carries the CP and terrorism stuff, so on and so forth, but everyone knows that already. There have been 0 Tor nodes seized in the last 3 years for any reason, including mistakes, while ppl still get arrested for the frauds done with the non-abusable, 100% trackable allowed services.
M
Congratulations, you still have "successfully" shown you are closed minded, ignorant, and light on sanity.
In your own words...
Have any proof?
So when i know what i'm doing and what the difference between an exit and a non-exit node is, can i host a non-exit node on a Hostigation VPS?
I can't tell you if @mitgib would allow this or not, but there is a very good general policy for such cases - "if you have to ask, then it's not allowed".
No Tor is allowed, it's in the ToS
q.e.d.
Because it's not worth the time or headache involved. If you ever decide to run your own hosting business, you'll understand that majority of the time things are disallowed because they require to many man hours, to much money, or take away from to much sleep to worry about.
To be completely honest TOR was allowed prior to these 2 threads on here. The primary reason I decided to not allow it is because of the attitude of people here defending it.
You blame providers for having a no-TOR policy instead of the people who cause providers to have that policy.
You say that providers don't allow it because it uses bandwidth but 99% of the providers on here have a much higher commit than any 1 VPS can push a month.
You expect providers who earn less than $2/month profit from a VPS to invest hundreds of dollars in man-power to deal with a protocol whose primary focus is on hiding things making it much harder for a provider AND the client to make sure it's not being used for illegal purposes.
You say the same can be done with httpd but httpd is not anonymous, there is accountability there. There internet is a numbers game and, unless the client posts their root password online, there are a very limited number of people who can edit their webserver where-as TOR can have thousands of people using it a day. The probability of 1 person doing something illegal over httpd with maybe 5 admins is much much much smaller than 1 person doing something illegal over TOR with tens of thousands of people using it a month.
It wouldn't be so bad if the client could be held accountable but they can't if TOR is allowed, they can only be held accountable if they violate our TOS which is why our own course of action is to not allow TOR.
Let's look at this from a legality standpoint since people are pushing that TOR is legal:
-ClientA purchase a VPS from a provider that allows TOR.
-ClientA's exit-node is used for illegal usages by a 3rd party who does not have access to his node and is only using it as part of the TOR network.
-ClientA IS NOT in violation of that companies Terms of Service and if that company decided to terminate their contract it could be considered a breach of contract because it would be the equivalent of terminating a client hosting a webserver because of a comment a 3rd party made on their blog.
And yes, before you say anything we could simply disallow exit-nodes but then I'd have to spend time VIOLATING PEOPLE'S PRIVACY (wait, isn't that the idea behind Tor is for freedom and privacy?) just to make sure they are following the rules.
As a user and supporter of Tor, let me apologize for the behavior of Maounique. I've run 100mbps+ relays, from dedicated providers that officially support them. Add it up - this uses a lot of bandwidth.
Hosting providers are entirely justified in blocking Tor in their terms of service. For many low-end providers, the average profit/user/month is pennies. Exit nodes are greatly abused, and this costs providers when they have to respond to each abuse complaint. Furthermore, setting a "non-exit" policy leads to confusion by less savvy users who somehow setup an exit.
So instead of bitching here, you should donate to projects that run legitimate exit services, like http://torservers.net/ and http://tor.noisebridge.net/ , or if you have the capabilities, run your own exits from providers where you can SWIP your info and take the abuse complaints yourself.
Don't be a dick. You make the rest of us look bad.
From a client PoV, I wouldn't want to be a neighbor to a TOR node on a VPS.
Seconded.
See, if all Tor supporters were like @Aaron, I probably wouldn't have added TOR to our TOS, but a few of you really got me thinking that all supporters had the same mindset.
He really gets it. If we were charging the $310/month like Axigy or $800/month like noisebridge.net is paying, we'd be more than happy to allow TOR and we'd even hire a legal specialist specifically to handle abuse complaints for your server so nobody would have to be bothered. It's unfortunate that our most popular plans are less than $30/year though so it is not possible for us to do.
I should also mention that if this thread were on WHT or another hosting forum, my views would be completely different. But it's on LET where the focus is under $7/month boxes. And let's face it, stable LEB providers aren't growing on trees so we have to limit the risks we can take to increase our chances of staying dry.
Thank you @Aaron, I've been hoping through this whole thread to see a response like that one. And I will be more than happy to take a look at those two sites and toss a bit their way.
@Aaron It is a bit late, you should have been here when they were all about 95% CP, warez and stuff and nobody asked for any proof, they took it as truth.
Providers DO NOT have to answer abuse complaints, they can forward automatically to operators. Over the years that was a very nice workable relation, even with LEB providers.
I run my own Tors, but the reasons I am looking for LEBs for small ones are:
1. Smaller fish are harder to block especially if they keep moving around;
2. Some LEB providers been not only neutral, but outright friendly, some get to run their own relay, there are not only KuJoes and giBmiTs around; besides, after the first pre-sales mail, many ppl get interested and at least learn about it;
3. A non-exit node does not generate complaints, period. There are ppl that setup open proxies and VPNs by mistake, are those services forbidden ? No those ppl get the boot as it should happen with Tor operators that dont know how to setup a non-exit node. I dont know any, could be some, however, setting this up at the command line etc, is not for everyone, and I doubt anyone that can read a .conf can make such mistakes.
Even if the provider allows exit nodes, I dont allow all ports !25, just the relevant ports for mail and web, as such, I never had DMCA bots hitting my provider, but cant say been trouble free, up to one complaint in 2 months for an average of 3+ exits, and 1 in 2 was from incompetents.
I never denied the right to any provider to block whatever they seem unfit, it is not me to judge this, but when you are dubbed kid molester, thief, criminal, "95%" probably dont react, but I do.
Just look at their reasoning and you will understand.
KuJoe, just above, says he blocked the non-exit nodes because, among other things, he would be forced to spy on ppl to enforce that, so he has absolutely no idea that all those are public and he only needs to open a page and CTRL+F the suspected IP, it does involve a lot of man hours for that, as well as clicking the suspend button if there is an exit node there. I dont want to put walls of text just to point out all the similar red herrings in that only 1 post, so I only took the last lines.
Since, for all other services it is trivial to make sure they are not used for illegal purposes and is much easier to know who is infringing (much easier than CTRL+F some page without any kind of spying, of course), get their home address and send the police to collect ppl that used stolen cards or hacked some sites, there are tons of police raids looking for Tor nodes and none about HTTP (SMTP, VPN, etc) stuff, the reasons provided are perfectly valid.
M
Which page is this exactly and how accurate is it? If it's truly as easy as you say I am all ears. I could have sworn I asked this same question earlier in this thread and the only answer I found was to open their config file.
Don't know about the accuracy, but you can get a list (CSV export available) of nodes here: torstatus.blutmagie.de
I don't see IPs, just hostnames on that page. I hope there is something more official.
BTW @miTgiB, you may want to check if 69.85.88.231 is running a tor node.
http://torstatus.blutmagie.de/router_detail.php?FP=65bbb9f4bcd1085fd8f0600641966c46b279ce11
@KuJoe I see IP's and hostnames on http://torstatus.blutmagie.de/ and when you click the IP it brings up swip info. Found 2 Tor nodes on my IP space, they have been warned.
I see them now. Is it just me or does that page take forever to load? Is there a US-based mirror by chance?