<div dir="ltr">Ok, changed to port 8080 and upped my allowed traffic a bit:<div><br></div><div>GNU nano 3.2 /etc/tor/torrc <br><br>Nickname gbridge<br>ORPort 8080<br>SocksPort 0<br>BridgeRelay 1<br>PublishServerDescriptor bridge<br>BridgeDistribution email<br>ServerTransportPlugin obfs4 exec /usr/bin/obfs4proxy<br>ServerTransportListenAddr obfs4 <a href="http://0.0.0.0:8080">0.0.0.0:8080</a><br>ExtOrPort auto<br>Log notice file /var/log/tor/notices.log<br>ExitPolicy reject *:*<br>AccountingMax 50 GB<br>ContactInfo keiferdodderblyyatgmaildoddercom<br><br>Yes, I have limited bandwidth I can give so as to avoid being massively charged for traffic. Perhaps there is a way to set tor to only allow traffic with a small connection? Thanks.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">--Keifer</div></div></div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 1:29 AM trinity pointard <<a href="mailto:trinity.pointard@gmail.com">trinity.pointard@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">> And the reason why it's on port 443 is so as to be on a port that's not likely blocked by network administrators.<br>
<br>
That might be useful for the ORPort of a relay, and for the obfs4 port<br>
of a bridge, but not for the ORPort of a bridge. Clients are not<br>
supposed to connect to it.<br>
The only reason it's exposed is because the bridge authority still<br>
requires it to verify the bridge is reachable. See<br>
<a href="https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues/7349" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues/7349</a>.<br>
You are better of using 443 for the ServerTransportListenAddr, and<br>
some high port for ORPort.<br>
<br>
On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 03:05, Keifer Bly <<a href="mailto:keifer.bly@gmail.com" target="_blank">keifer.bly@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Well,<br>
><br>
> So I just changed my torrc to this:<br>
><br>
> Nickname gbridge<br>
> ORPort 443<br>
> SocksPort 0<br>
> BridgeRelay 1<br>
> PublishServerDescriptor bridge<br>
> BridgeDistribution email<br>
> ServerTransportPlugin obfs4 exec /usr/bin/obfs4proxy<br>
> ServerTransportListenAddr obfs4 <a href="http://0.0.0.0:8080" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">0.0.0.0:8080</a><br>
> ExtOrPort auto<br>
> Log notice file /var/log/tor/notices.log<br>
> ExitPolicy reject *:*<br>
> AccountingMax 50 GB<br>
> ContactInfo keiferdodderblyyatgmaildoddercom<br>
><br>
> Trying to avoid being charged a huge amount for traffic as these VPS providers can be ridiculous when it comes to that, which is why it was set to so little. Ran killall -HUP tor to reload it and see that happens in the next day or so. And the reason why it's on port 443 is so as to be on a port that's not likely blocked by network administrators. Thank you.<br>
> --Keifer<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 2:23 PM trinity pointard <<a href="mailto:trinity.pointard@gmail.com" target="_blank">trinity.pointard@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Hi,<br>
>><br>
>> Your torrc is correct wrt to distribution mechanism (your bridge is<br>
>> indicating "bridge-distribution-request any" in the descriptor it<br>
>> sends), but for the record, the line would have been<br>
>> "BridgeDistribution any".<br>
>> A bridge uses less bandwidth than a relay, but it's still a proxy. At<br>
>> 5GB per month, you'd be providing a steady 16kbps over the month, or a<br>
>> single mbps for little over 11 hours. That's very little, if you can't<br>
>> have more bandwidth (by using a provider with no bandwidth accounting,<br>
>> or one that gives better pricing per bandwidth), I fear your bridge<br>
>> won't be very useful at all. Mine consumes between a few hundred GB<br>
>> and a few TB depending on the distribution mechanism.<br>
>><br>
>> Are you sure your bridge is reachable? Bridgestrap reports suggest it isn't.<br>
>> As the bridge operator, you should know its bridge line. Can you test<br>
>> it with Tor Browser to make sure?<br>
>> Given your accounting limits, it could be unreachable because<br>
>> currently hibernating. Or you could have a firewall issue, or<br>
>> something else.<br>
>> I believe not passing bridgestrap can explain not being assigned a<br>
>> distribution mechanism.<br>
>><br>
>> It might also explain why it would be considered blocked in Russia: if<br>
>> it's not reachable from anywhere, it's not reachable from Russia. An<br>
>> other possibility, given you use 443 for your ORPort, is that your<br>
>> bridge was indeed detected by just scanning the whole internet. The<br>
>> ORPort is very recognizable (enough that some of my former bridges<br>
>> ended up tagged "tor" on Shodan) so it should be put on a port that's<br>
>> less likely to be scanned.<br>
>><br>
>> Regards,<br>
>> trinity-1686a<br>
>><br>
>> On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 at 21:29, Keifer Bly <<a href="mailto:keifer.bly@gmail.com" target="_blank">keifer.bly@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Where in the torrc file would I set it to any? I am looking for a way to run a bridge without being charged a huge amount of money for it, and I was curious how it would have been detected by Russia if noone had used the bridge there? Thanks.<br>
>> > --Keifer<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 8:45 AM <<a href="mailto:lists@for-privacy.net" target="_blank">lists@for-privacy.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> On Samstag, 18. Februar 2023 18:56:00 CET Keifer Bly wrote:<br>
>> >> > Ok. Here is the torrc file:<br>
>> >> ><br>
>> >> > GNU nano 3.2 /etc/tor/torrc<br>
>> >> ><br>
>> >> ><br>
>> >> > Nickname gbridge<br>
>> >> > ORPort 443<br>
>> >> > SocksPort 0<br>
>> >> > BridgeRelay 1<br>
>> >> > PublishServerDescriptor bridge<br>
>> >> > ServerTransportPlugin obfs4 exec /usr/bin/obfs4proxy<br>
>> >> > ServerTransportListenAddr obfs4 <a href="http://0.0.0.0:8080" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">0.0.0.0:8080</a><br>
>> >> > ExtOrPort auto<br>
>> >> > Log notice file /var/log/tor/notices.log<br>
>> >> > ExitPolicy reject *:*<br>
>> >> > AccountingMax 5 GB<br>
>> >> > ContactInfo keiferdodderblyyatgmaildoddercom<br>
>> >> ><br>
>> >> ><br>
>> >> > Where in this torrc file is that configured?<br>
>> >> Then set it to 'any' and wait 24-48 hours to see what happens. Maybe there was<br>
>> >> an error in the db.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> If your bridge is still not distributed, it could be due to the outdated<br>
>> >> obfs4proxy or because of 'AccountingMax 5 GB'.<br>
>> >> Sorry but, 5 GB is a 'fart in the wind' the accounting period would only be a<br>
>> >> few hours a month. It's not even worth distributing them because it would only<br>
>> >> frustrate the users.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> > And how would it be blocked in<br>
>> >> > Russia already if it hasn't even been used?<br>
>> >> Why should this new feature of the bridgedb, more precisely the rdsys backend,<br>
>> >> have anything to do with whether someone uses a bridge? This is a bridgedb<br>
>> >> distribution method introduced by meskio.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >> --<br>
>> >> ╰_╯ Ciao Marco!<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Debian GNU/Linux<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> It's free software and it gives you freedom!_______________________________________________<br>
>> >> tor-relays mailing list<br>
>> >> <a href="mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org" target="_blank">tor-relays@lists.torproject.org</a><br>
>> >> <a href="https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> > _______________________________________________<br>
>> > tor-relays mailing list<br>
>> > <a href="mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org" target="_blank">tor-relays@lists.torproject.org</a><br>
>> > <a href="https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</a><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> tor-relays mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org" target="_blank">tor-relays@lists.torproject.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</a><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> tor-relays mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org" target="_blank">tor-relays@lists.torproject.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
tor-relays mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org" target="_blank">tor-relays@lists.torproject.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</a><br>
</blockquote></div>