Infomaniak is listed in the France section but it's a swiss company.
xattt 1 hours ago [-]
There is an 18-year-old record (updated in 2008!) about TekSavvy in Canada. The internet was different place back then. This info wouldn’t even relevant anymore as TekSavvy has since taken a business-centric approach in the interest of survival.
This list is fluffed up, without any checking for veracity. GIGO type of situation.
Given that archive.is is known to DDOS and alter archives (See all the recent HN posts about them)
observationist 3 hours ago [-]
I'm perfectly happy to continue using archive.is for so long as it remains functional.
JaggedJax 1 hours ago [-]
The turfing with this topic is strong and needs to be called out. Reliable sources are crucial now more than ever. We cannot tolerate and promote botnets once they are uncovered.
anonym29 2 hours ago [-]
archive.org outright removes large numbers of pages, including political content; archive.is has edited a handful of pages to redact the doxxing of the archive.is owners.
And onion urls are a sha hash of i think the private key of the site
poly2it 3 hours ago [-]
It's an onion link (TOR).
cc-d 3 hours ago [-]
thanks for rocking our archive site!
kittikitti 2 hours ago [-]
Thank you for sharing this, I was previously unaware of this table. While I don't plan on running a Tor node on any VPS or residential ISP, an option to do so signals that they value their customers. I will cross reference this table when picking out my next VPS at the very least.
TZubiri 2 hours ago [-]
If you are on the other team, this is also a good list if you want to avoid bad neighbors.
Hosts that don't ban tor nodes probably don't have a great reputation.
petcat 2 hours ago [-]
Not to mention, why on earth would I ever operate a TOR relay or exit node on my home internet connection? Maybe if I could guarantee that it could only be used by journalists or political dissidents, but everything else? No.
I don't need the authorities at my door every few weeks wondering why some of the most deplorable internet traffic of all time is coming from my house.
blfr 2 hours ago [-]
Relay nodes don't pose much risk and help mask/blend your own Tor traffic.
ssl-3 1 hours ago [-]
I agree with the concept. I should not be liable for the actions of others. If someone does something nefarious using my exit node (or the free wifi at my coffee shop) then that shouldn't be my responsibility.
After all, I have no way of knowing what they're up to. It may be good or it may be bad; I can't know. (I suppose I can set up a router to discard packets with the RFC 3514 evil bit set, as a show of good faith, but...)
So I think the risk should be low, but that's just, like, my opinion, man. My opinion doesn't mean that the risk is in fact low.
Has the risk of running an exit node ever been tested in court? Many people, myself included, simply can't afford to have that kind of experience even if we're reasonably sure that it will end up OK.
ikmckenz 1 hours ago [-]
Parent comment was talking about relay nodes, not exit nodes. The risk of running a relay node is essentially zero in a free country.
ssl-3 55 minutes ago [-]
I appreciate the correction. It's been so long since I've looked at tor that I guess I forgot that relay nodes were a thing and conflated the two terms. Or maybe the coffee hadn't started working yet.
So with the correction, I agree completely: Running relay node (a thing that deals only with indecipherably-encrypted anonymized data) is not a meaningful risk.
giantg2 1 hours ago [-]
Yeah, I've run a relay node without issues for a couple years.
ikmckenz 1 hours ago [-]
I think the hosts that Tor recommends against because there are already so many nodes hosted on them like OVH and Hetzner are perfectly happy with their (quite good) reputations.
knowaveragejoe 3 hours ago [-]
I see Comcast but no Verizon?
WalterGR 3 hours ago [-]
How is Verizon when it comes to Tor?
Rendered at 21:06:11 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
This list is fluffed up, without any checking for veracity. GIGO type of situation.
Given that archive.is is known to DDOS and alter archives (See all the recent HN posts about them)
There are also many web sites that provide an onion address in addition to their clearnet address. For example, the BBC: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50150981
Hosts that don't ban tor nodes probably don't have a great reputation.
I don't need the authorities at my door every few weeks wondering why some of the most deplorable internet traffic of all time is coming from my house.
After all, I have no way of knowing what they're up to. It may be good or it may be bad; I can't know. (I suppose I can set up a router to discard packets with the RFC 3514 evil bit set, as a show of good faith, but...)
So I think the risk should be low, but that's just, like, my opinion, man. My opinion doesn't mean that the risk is in fact low.
Has the risk of running an exit node ever been tested in court? Many people, myself included, simply can't afford to have that kind of experience even if we're reasonably sure that it will end up OK.
So with the correction, I agree completely: Running relay node (a thing that deals only with indecipherably-encrypted anonymized data) is not a meaningful risk.