Re: [tor-dnsbl] New Policy

On Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 09:51:28PM +0100, Sven 'Darkman' Michels wrote:
> Micha?? Koli??ski wrote:
> >>If some of you use other ports to allow clients to connect to as well,
> >>please give a shout, we'll add them if possible.
> >
> >80, 443, 8008, 8080 for HTTP
> >465 for SMTPS mail relay
> >587 for mail submission
> 
> Well, currently this list is targeted to stop abusive behavior
> like them with open proxys. So main target is email and irc
> i think. Since E-Mail spam usually comes on port 25 i think
> for now thats enough. IRC is a bit different, they're a few
> "well known" Ports for IRC + some Networks (mostly the bigger
> ones) have some additional ports, too. So i try to list them,
> too. So for now the ports you requested will not taken into
> account, sorry.

Seems to me the problem is that the connections are completely
anonymous with no way even for the administrators of the TOR hosts
to regulate them.  So it doesn't matter what ports they do or do not
block, the lot of them should be in a DNSBL if people care about
that.

What's the point of saying "anonymous internet access is fine as
long as any service that can be abused is protected from it"?
Newsflash, almost all internet-facing services can be abused.

So as a non-user of this DNSBL I humbly suggest not removing TOR
hosts that say they have applied filtering -- they are not capable
of assuring that the hosts won't be used for abuse and don't see
themself as responsible for doing so.

-- 
Andy Smith -- Occasional BOPM Developer And Support Monkey.  Please copy
all BOPM support queries to the BOPM list, _not_ just directly to me!
If I've helped you with BOPM then please check my wishlist!
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/registry/23IJ4U7N4J3X9

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFCDpDmIJm2TL8VSQsRAtysAJ9d7dTPq+cBzJyExoURvaFBbmFdBACgm33n
Qkl1gcH3yE3jLbV2urHNqWw=
=vMz+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----