Sounds like CloudFlare's threat policy.
On Sep 27, 2016 2:36 PM, "Tim Semeijn" noc@babylon.network wrote:
Always watching my ass to be a good old Tor operator, I got my nodes on the list. Always fun to see how one time not updating all your MyFamily's gets you marked for life xD
Time for some conf-updating.
On 27/09/16 19:37, nusenu wrote:
pa011@web.de wrote:
there is that list of "potentially_dangerous_relaygroups" you
published.
Could yo please emphasize a bit more on what brings a relay on that
list, apart from incorrect given MyFamily which doesnt seem to be always the case.
I mean I see quite a few well respected names on that list ?
to quote from https://github.com/ornetstats/stats (1) "dangerous" in the sense that a tor client might has a chance to use more than one of these relays in a single circuit (2) these relays are aggregated based on contact information (3) if their groupsize is bigger than their effective family size and they are operated in more than one /16 network block they are listed (4) this list might contain false-positives (contact information is not authenticated)
Does that answer your question?
I probably should also filter entries where two out of guard_prob, middle_prob and exit_prob are 0 since that means that (1) is never the case - iff onionoo is right about these probabilities.
tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
-- Tim Semeijn Babylon Network
PGP: 0x2A540FA5 / 3DF3 13FA 4B60 E48A E755 9663 B187 0310 2A54 0FA5
tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays