[tor-talk] ReachableAddresses *:* harmful?

[Fernan Bolando]

On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Roger Dingledine <arma at mit.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 10:18:53AM +0800, Fernan Bolando wrote:
>>
>> In my torrc, in order to use bridges that uses ports other than 80,443
>>
>> Is it acceptable to simply use
>> ReachableAddresses *:*
>>
>> or allowing only specific ports
>> ReachableAddresses *:9001,*:8080,*:80,*:443
>
> If you've configured your Tor client to use bridges, then you probably
> want to allow it to reach all the bridges you've configured.
>
> In that case "reachableaddresses *:*" is the right choice. In fact,
> that's even the default. It shouldn't hurt anything in any case.
>
> You should only change reachableaddresses if your local Internet
> connection is firewalled by your ISP in terms of what destinations you
> can reach.

Thanks, Actually openbsd seems to defaults this to
ReachableAddresses *:80,*:443

So when I found it tedious to manually add each of bridge ports and
decided to simply set it to allow everything, got me wondering what
the was the preferred approach.

thanks again
fernan