[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: documentation/behavior unclear of (tor-hidden-service)
From: |
ng0 |
Subject: |
Re: documentation/behavior unclear of (tor-hidden-service) |
Date: |
Mon, 6 Mar 2017 20:19:02 +0000 |
On 17-03-06 13:47:12, Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 06:00:30PM +0000, ng0 wrote:
> > from my experience they are not needed for a relay. Okay, they would be
> > useful to increase security and to see how how Chinese government
> > officials and their automated services want to get into your server, but
> > it's not really necessary for the relay.
>
> Slight nitpick: In my experience with iptables, it's not just Chinese
> officials that want to break in to my servers, but rather a dazzling
> multitude of people from all over the world ;)
>
My experience with OpenNIC and tor on the server side was that it's
mostly government IPs running lazy standard methods trying to get in
where they won't get in anyway.
Just don't use port 22, rate-limit connections (with OpenNIC this worked
a bit) and the IPs which traced back directly to those red zones in
chinese cities marked as "military/government zones" went away :).
But yeah, with tor they were in company of russia, USA, and other
nations trying to do the same ;D
- documentation/behavior unclear of (tor-hidden-service), ng0, 2017/03/04
- Re: documentation/behavior unclear of (tor-hidden-service), ng0, 2017/03/04
- Re: documentation/behavior unclear of (tor-hidden-service), Ludovic Courtès, 2017/03/06
- Re: documentation/behavior unclear of (tor-hidden-service), ng0, 2017/03/06
- Re: documentation/behavior unclear of (tor-hidden-service), Ludovic Courtès, 2017/03/06
- Re: documentation/behavior unclear of (tor-hidden-service), dian_cecht, 2017/03/06
- Re: documentation/behavior unclear of (tor-hidden-service), ng0, 2017/03/06
- Re: documentation/behavior unclear of (tor-hidden-service), Leo Famulari, 2017/03/06
- Re: documentation/behavior unclear of (tor-hidden-service),
ng0 <=