Source
r/onions•
nmapLocalhost

Please be respectful (how DMCA notices screwed me over)

I ran an open exit node for about 1 week.

A few days ago, my ISP received two DMCA complaints, disabled my Internet connection, and threatened to permanently blacklist me from getting service with them ever again (Mediacom). No argument was allowed, no exceptions could be made for running an exit node. Mind you, I don't pirate anymore, so these complaints are certainly caused by TOR.

I cancelled service with them, and am trying to find a more TOR friendly ISP.

Anyway: Please be respectful. TOR is not designed for torrenting, and you stand to screw over honest, generous people if you do.

UPDATE: Spoke with a new ISP (Socket), and they're fine with me running an exit node on a dedicated IP. Looks like not-being-a-dick just earned them a new customer.

Posted Feb 20, 2012, 10:14 PM UTC · edited

1812
DMBuce•

These two links describe the risks incurred by running an exit node. Personally, I would never run one on the same connection I browse on. Too much hassle.

7
nmapLocalhostOP•

Thanks for the links.

I was aware of the risks at the time, but figured I could sweet-talk my way out of trouble.

I'm talking with a new ISP about two separate IPs, one for TOR exclusively, the other for regular browsing. Hopefully they're more agreeable than my previous ISP, and if not, no exit node for me; or at least some pretty severe exit policy will be applied.

1
sfacets•

You're lucky you only got in trouble for the pirating... it could have been a lot worse.

4
eleitl•

I had multiple altercations with the local police when I ran my Tor exit node on residential broadband (this being Germany).

I've switched to middleman and later moved the node to the colo. A while ago I switched the exit policy from pure middleman to below

reject 0.0.0.0/8:*

reject 169.254.0.0/16:*

reject 127.0.0.0/8:*

reject 192.168.0.0/16:*

reject 10.0.0.0/8:*

reject 172.16.0.0/12:*

reject 78.46.119.2:*

accept *:22

accept *:443

accept *:465

accept *:563

accept *:992-995

reject :

which is sufficiently tight yet still useful to make sense. I have had no complaints so far.

2
4j0sh4•

I think that the name TOR confuses some people. They probably think TORrent privacy! Yay! I wish that more people would read the TOR guidelines.

1
[deleted]•

That is the tip of the iceberg. Consider not running an exit node unless you have anonymous internet.

1
caphector•

Speakeasy was pretty cool with me running an exit node, but they did want me to block torrents going through tor after getting two DMCA noticed.

When I replied the first time (to an e-mail) I gave 'em the EFF boilerplate and after the second notice the security dude I talked to said that he saw the boilerplate and that they just wanted to stop getting notices.

1
Borax•

Is it possible to block torrents through your node?

1
nmapLocalhostOP•

It'd be easiest to only allow certain types of traffic, blocking all else.

Allow email, web browsing, etc. Everything else would get dropped.

2
AndHereIsTheSource•

I see you got yourself copy rights police, USA..

0
[deleted]•

From what I heard TOR doesn't even hide your IP when downloading a torrent so why bother?

0
nmapLocalhostOP•

Then you heard wrong. It will, and the person running the exit node can get screwed because of it.

Tor will tunnel whatever traffic you throw through it.

2