Pun Krocker wrote:

Look up the IP and complain to the provider.

Graham

On 14 Feb 2007, Lurch <usenet@sjwelectrical.co.uk> wrote:

Perhaps best to see if the IP is listed on the status page for Tor
servers, at <https://nighteffect.us/tns/?SR=IP&SO=Asc> but whether
there's an easy way to complain about some random user whose link
has been via one of these is another matter - it's a case of get
the lot shut down, or block them from accessing the website (and
later check for new nodes). Personally I see the latter method
as a better option than the former.

Pun Krocker wrote:

Whose is it then ?

FWIW some clot using an anonymising service was causing some trouble in a
newsgroup so I phoned the them up and complained about the abuse of their
service.

The problem ceased.

Graham

NoNeedToKnow wrote:

You can also complain to whoever is the provider of their connectivity.

Graham

On 14 Feb 2007, Eeyore wrote:

Which achieves "what" exactly? If user at IP "a.b.c.d" is using this
software to get access to a website via address "v.w.x.y" (and some
other address the next time, and another, the next), then complaining
about the user at IP "v.w.x.y" could get them into trouble with their
ISP but does nothing to target "a.b.c.d".

Blocking each of the IPs shown on the 'nighteffect.us' link (a series of
"v.w.x.y" addresses) as potential access entries will block anyone who
attempts to use that service for access, without causing trouble for
those who are willing to put their computer into service for free.

Your approach could end with the closedown of the Tor network but do
little to 'get' the abusive user at IP "a.b.c.d" (or whatever it is
the next time), and at the same time, make an enemy (ISP to user
"We have had a complaint from the webmaster of example.com about
access to their forum via your IP") of each of those who offered
their computer for altruistic reasons, their friends, and all the
people who are affected by the removal of those computers from the
Tor service... User at 'a.b.c.d' goes onto other anonymizer web
services, some free, some paid for, and is still a pain...

Good thinking, not! I guess you might re-think and see if you have
some alternative conclusion. As for Pun Krocker, I would hope they
see a formal complaint could backfire, big time.

On 14 Feb 2007, Eeyore wrote:

different when it is some 'paid for' service compared with a free one
working through individual users, worldwide, in a P2P network model.

On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:24:50 +0000, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> mused:

hence the question.
--
Regards,
Stuart.

In message
<7sk6t29k1974o7dcree4a77dqtn4mg22hs@complete-pc-services.info>,
NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> writes
it's a pity that the Tor network software is incapable of setting to
block abusive IP's from using Tor to anonymise

--
dave @ stejonda

On 14 Feb 2007, "dave @ stejonda" wrote:

Problem is that one needs to know the 'abusive IP' to be able to block
it. Perhaps what would be better would be a way for someone to mark a
site (not IP) as "not accepting connections from the Tor network" which
would mean that the site owner would not need to blacklist the IPs and a
new node would not accept a request to connect to the website (whereas in
the method I suggested earlier, the site owner needs to blacklist many IPs
and the following week, when a new server is added, there's another chance
that a connection might be made).

Of course, completely against the spirit of anonymity, but in keeping with
a non-abuse policy, certain websites could be flagged as wanting records
to be kept if someone used the Tor network to connect, such that abuse
could be traced (via Tor admin/abuse) to determine which IP was the
initiator. I don't see that idea taking off, though :-)

NoNeedToKnow wrote:

It doesn't stop you doing it though.

I've found ISPs to take abuse very seriously.

Graham

NoNeedToKnow wrote:

They are probably in contravention of the ISP's TOS/AUP. Make this clear in your
complaint.

Do your homework and the problem will cease. I speak from experience

Graham

Lurch wrote:

The answer there is to focus on the IP provided.

The provider will be bothered if it's causing trouble.

Graham

On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:35:42 +0000, in uk.telecom.broadband ,
NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote:

Such people must understand that their altruism can be used for ill as
well as good, and they have to accept the consequences of their
actions may be negative to them.

Mhm, and you pursue him there too. Sooner or later, he's going to
decide you're not worth the trouble, and go bother someone else who
doesn't make complaints.

Or it could work well. Most such people are probably just mucking
about and think they're hidden and thus invincible. Catch them out,
get their ISP to send them a stinky letter, and they may well snap out
of it. Worst case, they enter into a concerted campaign against you.

But frankly, just letting them carry on is, for my money, like giving
in to terrorists.
--
Mark McIntyre