html
>
> I was just wondering if there is any reason it would be violating any
> Bitfolk policies and any best practise tips you can give me to
> minimize any impact.
>
> Thank you,
> Daniel
>
The link you gave doesn't go into any technical detail. What does this
do that a normal tor relay/bridge doesn't? Specifically, what sort of
things will it do that *might* bring you into violation of Bitfolk T&C?
M
From danielcase10@??? Sat Feb 11 15:39:51 2012
Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f48.google.com ([209.85.215.48])
by mail.bitfolk.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16)
(Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <danielcase10@???>)
id 1RwF3H-0002k1-3e
for users@???; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 15:39:51 +0000
Received: by lagw12 with SMTP id w12so4508535lag.21
for <users@???>; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 07:39:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=jMW0qs1dtCXrYy257Uuf7kK7zBboJPy0jeWey0kpDbY=;
b=GFW6aEyf2tSzFwIQXx+ACbvy6jazWQQ3WS41aJP54vqcDzIELKX1jnnHIzReZPlLaX
iOX7lMUfD6nTxzyS7JsAJut9eLJamLwvV26F+C4c11RqHk0CqOaZf8RSTAZVOc6S5Ytt
geG+0Er3A4XYr7mjwhn3aceebjpJYEl10lsTQ=
Received: by 10.112.102.129 with SMTP id fo1mr3563930lbb.0.1328974785112; Sat,
11 Feb 2012 07:39:45 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.152.112.232 with HTTP; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 07:39:25 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20120211152619.GF23380@???>
References: <CALdaYd06o3HAm_p+C7Qn87FJJbBftEiEm1FMBs_dDf4PkNF5yA@???>
<20120211152619.GF23380@???>
From: Daniel Case <danielcase10@???>
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 15:39:25 +0000
Message-ID: <CALdaYd3_K6W9s-E7ErUY68xXqFsB3rZxWEFCDAGBbvYRd+3CpA@???>
To: Andy Smith <andy@???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Virus-Scanner: Scanned by ClamAV on mail.bitfolk.com at Sat,
11 Feb 2012 15:39:51 +0000
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.215.48
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: danielcase10@???
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
spamd2.lon.bitfolk.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
DKIM_VALID_AU, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Report: * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
low * trust * [209.85.215.48 listed in list.dnswl.org]
* -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
* -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's * domain
* -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
* 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily
* valid
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:14:11 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail.bitfolk.com)
Cc: users@???
Subject: Re: [bitfolk] Tor Obsfucation
X-BeenThere: users@???
X-Mai
