1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1XBhyh-0000MI-B5
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 28 Jul 2014 10:16:23 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.218.52 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.218.52; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-oi0-f52.google.com;
Received: from mail-oi0-f52.google.com ([209.85.218.52])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1XBhyg-0003aL-AW
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 28 Jul 2014 10:16:23 +0000
Received: by mail-oi0-f52.google.com with SMTP id h136so5724424oig.25
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 28 Jul 2014 03:16:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.132.203 with SMTP id ow11mr48778933oeb.47.1406542576736;
Mon, 28 Jul 2014 03:16:16 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.35.234 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Jul 2014 03:16:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgRVUbEM=7KQt-Haue=+sgAFu=HrfDdS0hhatNawci_eZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD5xwhhKKooGBfSY3nZzMmS=3WD=EdX9FQ7mZtQL3fkikuwyLg@mail.gmail.com>
<20140728024030.GA17724@savin>
<CAAS2fgR+r6VoUse_ropq=p3WTy_qWq68fpCQim1FhcbkCXYtsQ@mail.gmail.com>
<E0F82AAE-1B71-4B8B-A5D5-0301BBECC317@osfda.org>
<53D5BB5F.2060200@bitwatch.co>
<CAAS2fgRVUbEM=7KQt-Haue=+sgAFu=HrfDdS0hhatNawci_eZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 12:16:16 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: -R6WPBBRNHHxvbVcrvzGSDoi5GQ
Message-ID: <CANEZrP10sFWiBv=yi0YaPszzxrygfRhwTP8fdqKapSL1yucfow@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b41cc74a5e36a04ff3e3695
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1XBhyg-0003aL-AW
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Abnormally Large Tor node accepting only
Bitcoin traffic
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 10:16:23 -0000
--047d7b41cc74a5e36a04ff3e3695
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> As I pointed out above, =E2=80=94 it isn't really. Without the exit flag=
, I
> believe no tor node will select it to exit 8333 unless manually
> configured. (someone following tor more closely than I could correct
> if I'm wrong here)
>
The "exit" flag doesn't mean what you would expect it to mean. The reason
such a node won't get much traffic is that Tor speculatively builds
circuits at startup on the assumption they'll be used for web browsing.
Thus if you don't exit web traffic you won't get much in the way of traffic
at least not until bitcoinj based wallets start shipping Tor mode.
There's a perfectly reasonable explanation for why someone would run such a
node. In fact I run a Tor exit that only allows port 8333 too: it's a way
to contribute exit bandwidth without much risk of getting raided by the
cops.
Occam's razor and all ....
--047d7b41cc74a5e36a04ff3e3695
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"">As I pointed out above, =E2=
=80=94 it isn't really. =C2=A0Without the exit flag, I<br>
</div>
believe no tor node will select it to exit 8333 unless manually<br>
configured. (someone following tor more closely than I could correct<br>
if I'm wrong here)<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The "exit&q=
uot; flag doesn't mean what you would expect it to mean. The reason suc=
h a node won't get much traffic is that Tor speculatively builds circui=
ts at startup on the assumption they'll be used for web browsing. Thus =
if you don't exit web traffic you won't get much in the way of traf=
fic at least not until bitcoinj based wallets start shipping Tor mode.</div=
>
<div><br></div><div>There's a perfectly reasonable explanation for why =
someone would run such a node. In fact I run a Tor exit that only allows po=
rt 8333 too: it's a way to contribute exit bandwidth without much risk =
of getting raided by the cops.</div>
</div><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Occam's razor and all ....</=
div></div>
--047d7b41cc74a5e36a04ff3e3695--
|
