That stinks.

Linode has the same policy WRT exit relays. 

If they get too many abuse complaints, they ask you to stop running a relay.  The way US law is structured, I can't actually blame them for this.

However they don't care if you're running a middle node. Your bandwidth/VPS, your call.   A *lot* of people run bridge nodes there, myself included.

-Chris
(Running an exit relay in the US cost effectively seems quite difficult)



On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:51 AM, mick <mbm@rlogin.net> wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jul 2013 10:49:46 -0400
Tom Ritter <tom@ritter.vg> allegedly wrote:

> Sending this out, as I suspect I am not the only person running a node
> on SiteValley, as they have pretty good bandwidth for pretty cheap.
>
> I had inquired in the beginning if they allowed Tor, and they said
> yes, but if we get too many abuse complaints we'll shut it down.  So
> maybe 4 or 5 abuse complaints later they did indeed give me the
> ultimatum to shut it down or get shut down.  So I made them give me a
> new IP address, and made it into a middle node.  (The new IP was
> because I was thinking of making it a bridge.)

Hmm. Pretty crummy AUP. And /very/ crummy treatment of a customer.

I wonder if we are going to see more of this sort of thing now. I
think the tor network needs greater geographic diversity.

Mick

---------------------------------------------------------------------

 Mick Morgan
 gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B  72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312
 http://baldric.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays




--
Christopher Patti - Geek At Large | GTalk: cpatti@gmail.com | AIM: chrisfeohpatti | P: (260) 54PATTI
"Technology challenges art, art inspires technology." - John Lasseter, Pixar