LITTLEBLACKDOG.COM

Posted: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:16 am Post subject:

I say allow them to use TOR.

When I joined I read through a bunch of the forums and realized that there was a great deal of Tech Knowledge here to be "cultivated". But as paranoia goes I wanted to join from an anonymous IP (School). There are quite a few people here with the knowledge and skill to find out a lot of information about a particular IP address.

I only logged in from school for most of my puppy years here, but after a while I began to feel comfortable and I started logging in from home (though I was still using proxys Embarassed

). But as more time passed I turned off the proxies for this site and just login directly.

I say allow freedom of anonymity.

Yes I know I can't spell

Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:26 am Post subject:

I guess using proxies for use is one thing. Using proxies to establish oneself here would be another. Plus a spammer could easily bounce around the net without having a permanent IP which can/does enable them to repeatedly sign up for forums. Tor is probably a bad thing to allow

Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:34 am Post subject:

I can see the use of proxies...since most likely you will only have 1 IP address throughout your login session at LBD.

Tor and the other service I mentioned allow you to automatically change your IP address every X minutes or on each web page request.

I believe that people using Tor or similar services have more to hide than the average or security conscious person...but I still voted to not take action until you see it is abused.

Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:20 am Post subject:

Toxin wrote:
Good question. I can see arguments for and against. However, despite seeing contrary arguments, I'd be inclined to allow it. Anonymity is a right, not a privilege.

As for a technical consideration, is an IP ban the only method available for stopping spammers?

I've gone for the "defer the decision" option. If someone does abuse it, it ought to be easy enough to clean up the mess and implement some blocks against it.

Am I mistaken, isn't the problem how to know who is abusing it before damage is done? I voted no because, while I don't think the member dogs need to know where everyone is coming from, the administrative dogs need to be hounds and be very careful at the gates. It seems we have two sorts of members. There is, firstly, a very close community who learn each other's given names as well as their nicks, who know each other outside of the pound and who share themselves, addresses, emails, and pictures; the second group is in a category which prefers and should have the right to be anonymous until they trust their safety, lurk to their heart's content, sign in as guests or whatever, play games with their identity, but are in no way malevolent, rather, mischievous; the third category are those who spam, hack and have evil intentions behind their actions while looking for more subjects for their predation. I would like to prevent the third category from polluting LWD/LBD in any manner. To me, we are a community. While we may have an open door to friends at all times, we should slam the door on our enemies.

Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 3:39 pm Post subject:

yiayia49 wrote:
Toxin wrote:
Good question. I can see arguments for and against. However, despite seeing contrary arguments, I'd be inclined to allow it. Anonymity is a right, not a privilege.

As for a technical consideration, is an IP ban the only method available for stopping spammers?

I've gone for the "defer the decision" option. If someone does abuse it, it ought to be easy enough to clean up the mess and implement some blocks against it.

Am I mistaken, isn't the problem how to know who is abusing it before damage is done? I voted no because, while I don't think the member dogs need to know where everyone is coming from, the administrative dogs need to be hounds and be very careful at the gates. It seems we have two sorts of members. There is, firstly, a very close community who learn each other's given names as well as their nicks, who know each other outside of the pound and who share themselves, addresses, emails, and pictures; the second group is in a category which prefers and should have the right to be anonymous until they trust their safety, lurk to their heart's content, sign in as guests or whatever, play games with their identity, but are in no way malevolent, rather, mischievous; the third category are those who spam, hack and have evil intentions behind their actions while looking for more subjects for their predation. I would like to prevent the third category from polluting LWD/LBD in any manner. To me, we are a community. While we may have an open door to friends at all times, we should slam the door on our enemies.

The problem with blocking sites/services like Tor is for your category two group. We don't want to block any new users or members who like their anonymity and may be utilizing these services. Granted, most would probably just use a proxy server that has a fixed IP...there are some users who may prefer the Tor service.

I voted to block it only if its abused...but in reality only one good defense has been posted, which has been to use it as a proxy from work...which a regular proxy would do just as well in this case.

pdk68 wrote:

Hell as far s i know O could be schizophrenic and everyone on here could be here multiple personalities.

Oh god, maybe I am just one of her personalities too?

it's called Dissociative Identity Disorder...
THERE'S A DIFFERENCE!!!!

Pdk... you have been very naughty.
It's time to integrate.

Butt Sniffer Joined: 09 Nov 2000 Posts: 1883

OhioArt2 wrote:
Pdk... you have been very naughty.
It's time to integrate.

YAY!!!!

pdk68 wrote:
OhioArt2 wrote:
Pdk... you have been very naughty.
It's time to integrate.

YAY!!!!

I have heard that inter* is great. Laughing

Guide Dog Joined: 08 Nov 2003 Posts: 8419 Location: MN

pdk68 wrote:
OhioArt2 wrote:
Pdk... you have been very naughty.
It's time to integrate.

YAY!!!!

lucky bastered...

Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:32 pm Post subject:

This thread sure went off track, didn't it? doesn't anyone else have an opinion on TOR?

Butt Sniffer Joined: 09 Nov 2000 Posts: 1883

yiayia49 wrote:
This thread sure went off track, didn't it? doesn't anyone else have an opinion on TOR?

You sound suprised it went off track.

I have an opinion on Thor, he's awesome, and his hammer ain't no joke either.

Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:06 am Post subject:

I've changed my vote. Er, at least, I've changed my opinion. The forum won't let me alter my vote.

I think access from TOR services should be allowed. Anyone using a public (i.e. unsecured) internet connection such as that found in hotels, public wifi hotspots, etc., should use an anonymising/encryption service anyway, merely to discourage opportunistic packet-sniffers.

And, the other night, when I tried to do just that, I got a phpBB "You've been banned from this forum" message. Well, I don't especially want my forum password sent in the clear, unless it's from a network I know, such as the one here at home.

Not every use of a service such as TOR is nefarious. There are many perfectly legitimate uses for such a service.

Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:33 pm Post subject:

Toxin wrote:
I've changed my vote. Er, at least, I've changed my opinion. The forum won't let me alter my vote.

I think access from TOR services should be allowed. Anyone using a public (i.e. unsecured) internet connection such as that found in hotels, public wifi hotspots, etc., should use an anonymising/encryption service anyway, merely to discourage opportunistic packet-sniffers.

And, the other night, when I tried to do just that, I got a phpBB "You've been banned from this forum" message. Well, I don't especially want my forum password sent in the clear, unless it's from a network I know, such as the one here at home.

Not every use of a service such as TOR is nefarious. There are many perfectly legitimate uses for such a service.

Good point, Toxin. Ed, how much more work does this put on tech staff?

Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 1:23 pm Post subject:

Toxin wrote:
I've changed my vote. Er, at least, I've changed my opinion. The forum won't let me alter my vote.

I think access from TOR services should be allowed. Anyone using a public (i.e. unsecured) internet connection such as that found in hotels, public wifi hotspots, etc., should use an anonymising/encryption service anyway, merely to discourage opportunistic packet-sniffers.

And, the other night, when I tried to do just that, I got a phpBB "You've been banned from this forum" message. Well, I don't especially want my forum password sent in the clear, unless it's from a network I know, such as the one here at home.

Not every use of a service such as TOR is nefarious. There are many perfectly legitimate uses for such a service.

If you got the PHPbb "you've been banned" message, then we have had spam from that network. If you send me the IP address I can tell you whether or not it was collateral or direct.

I can say that in the case of North American IP blocks, I do not ban past class C when a spam attack occurs. This means in English, that 253 IP addresses are banned for any North American block that I ban, that is if I choose to ban one. In practice, I don't always ban them. It seriously depends on how much spam traffic I'm seeing. So if you get me the IP address, and for chrissakes, mail me the IP address you're on if you get this message. You can complain to your ISP about spammers operating on YOUR network. I can't.

So I'd be sorry that you got the IP ban message, but then again, we haven't had spam in a few weeks so I'm not that sorry at all. Newer versions of the antispam MODs are coming which might let me remove IP banlists from North America and Europe altogether. I can't remove the Asian ones at this point, the bulk of our spam attempts are from China and Korea, and other Asian IP blocks.

So email me anytime you have a problem and I will lift the ban on that range. You can always get ahold of me if you try.

Leg Humper Joined: 01 Jun 2004 Posts: 4702 Location: Utah

I'm with mostly everyone else... There's lots of perfectly legitimate uses for TOR (I've even used it myself, rather a nice piece of software - although hopping through all those proxy's doesn't produce the speediest connection possible...), and if it hasn't been significantly abused, then I don't see why we should ban prospective new forum members (or existing ones that use it, even).

Toxin wrote:

yiayia49 wrote:

Toxin wrote:

pdk68 wrote:

OhioArt2 wrote:

pdk68 wrote:

OhioArt2 wrote:

pdk68 wrote:

OhioArt2 wrote:

yiayia49 wrote:

Toxin wrote:

Toxin wrote:

Lycander wrote: