If you have run a forum you will know the enormous problem caused by content spammers. They attempt to register and then some time later spew out their junk. Sometimes it is just spam at others it is a variety of hacking attempts or content skimming. They, usually, use a variety of anonymising methods zombie nets, Tor etc. At one point I had to take down a forum because of this. I have now added more security software which has reduced bogus hits from several hundred a day to a trickle. One of the main contributions to this reduction is rejecting connections from known Tor exit nodes.

On 11 February 2012 17:07, Andy Smith <andy@bitfolk.com> wrote:

Hi Johnathon,

On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 04:53:38PM +0000, Johnathon wrote:
> As far as I'm aware, this is a 'bridge' to the standard ssl/encrypted Tor network, not an exit node, so blocking 25/22 shouldn't be nessasary?
>
> Re exit nodes, I've seen white-hats using them to shutdown an entire botnet before. It's not just the blacks/greys who use Tor.

You would have to take a personal judgement call on whether you feel
the hassle of the bad traffic outweighs the benefit of the good.

I receive automated alerts nearly every day regarding Tor exit nodes
at BitFolk being used to connect to botnet C+C IRC channels. The
only reason why I don't pass *those* on is because I know the people
sending them don't expect a reply and I know my customer is just
going to go "uh, it's Tor". These are most likely not whitehats
shutting them down.

Maybe I *should* start passing those on too, just so that Tor exit
node operators can get some view on the scale of abuse they are
enabling along with all the free speech.

Cheers,
Andy

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREDAAYFAk82oDsACgkQIJm2TL8VSQtXnQCg0dAd3tclfYhNtQK/fYCAtAQ+
3A4AoN7Mx14QtFgunhG7vEnJg9VaSrzM
=suZR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@lists.bitfolk.com
https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/listinfo/users