Sounds overly complex...
I honestly believe that allowing tor support is absolutely necessary for Rizon to be congruent to a free and open society. Yes, with tor comes some potential for abuse, but it's easier to manage this on a per-channel basis than by just flatly banning an open proxy (which really just shifts would-be miscreants to other open proxies -- and you're fighting a losing battle if you think you can ban them all) and shutting down potentially mission-critical use cases.
Best case for a would-be victim of oppression is that they simply can't access Rizon. Worst case is that they get caught accessing Rizon and charged for political dissidence or any other charges which can be brought against people. This may seem like a far-fetched nightmare, but in some countries this is just a way of life.
The solution you proposed, whilst very thorough, implies far more work than is actually required. All that Rizon developers would need to do to allow tor access is to import a list of tor exit nodes IP (you already have this, or you couldn't ban tor) and to apply a hostmask to all users from those IPs. This way, channel operators could choose to ban the entire tor hostmask if required. This is really an hour or two maximum of work, I'm not sure how it's not infinitely more desirable than just banning tor.
If more help is required, just let me know. I've done similar on private IRCds before.
I will also offer a 5 Bitcoin (~$50) or $50 Liberty Reserve donation to the Rizon network upon implementation of tor support, and encourage others with similar opinions to do the same.
Reply With Quote