[tor-relays] >23% Tor exit relay capacity found to be malicious - call for support for proposal to limit large scale attacks

[Charly Ghislain]

I have nothing against this proposal although im not sure it would be that
much efficient.
Especially, how does it make relay operations 'less sustainable' or 'more
risky'?

@Imre Jonk: why would you want - and why should you have - an higher
probability?
Sounds to me the ideal case is an infinite amount of independent exits with
an almost-zero probability.

C

On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 12:28 AM Felix <zwiebel at quantentunnel.de> wrote:

> Hi nusenu
>
> Thank's you for your encouraging efforts to keep things safe.
>
> Am 05.07.2020 um 18:35 schrieb nusenu:
> > To prevent this from happening over and over again
> > I'm proposing two simple but to some extend effective relay requirements
> > to make malicious relay operations more expensive, time consuming,
> > less sustainable and more risky for such actors
>
> Is an issue real or not? Any answer to that question does not contradict
> a substantial method. Right, the proposed measure is not against
> sneek-in attackers but it buys time to detect and tackle sudden issues.
> Let's move forward. I hear you.
>
> --
> Cheers, Felix
> _______________________________________________
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20200706/c3bcdec9/attachment.htm>