Quote from: CrunchyFrog on November 30, 2011, 05:50 amQuote from: DrBenwayRunning a bridge will give you the plausible deniability of running a relay, without also putting you in the very easily acquired list of relay nodes...The public relay list -- especially including Exonerator -- is key to documenting a plausible denial. A denial without proof is merely an assertion; I think it's safe to assume that's why Exonerator exists to begin with.Bingo!Tor was dying for exit relays (Did you know that well over 50% - closer to 80% at times, of Tor exit traffic goes through a few Tor-ran exit servers, with bandwidth from a few hundred megs/ sec up to a gig /sec each - they have a program you can donate to assist with this) so they came up with the ExoneraTor.Say someone sends an email threatening to kill the president, and the secret service shows up at your house. "It wasn't me," you exclaim, "I was running a Tor relay."With the ExoneraTor they can check and say yes, at 2:31 pm on Aug 4, CrunchyFrog was indeed running a Tor Relay with an exit policy allowing ports 587 and 2525 to forward email.It doesn't prove you didn't do it, but it does prove that anyone else could also have done it, raising more than sufficient doubt that without solid corroborating evidence the matter would be dropped. It's still going to take up some of your time, and there's a good chance they'll seize your computer until they work the matter out. Best not to have anything on there you don't mind the states representatives pouring over.Mind you, running an exit relay is an invite to getting a visit from officialdom at some point in time, eventually. It's not a case of if, but when. Running an exit relay if you're not as pure as the driven snow is just stupid. Most private exit relays are ran on rented hosts; the Tor blog has a good list of hosts that will put up with the complaints and takedown notices which will be forwarded to you to explain about exit relays to the complainants.