- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Relay node requirements
by sqrrm 13 Mar '18

13 Mar '18

The distributed bitcoin exchange Bisq is reliant on Tor as a communication layer and as such dependent on its stability. To support the network we're looking at incentivizing contributors to run their own Tor relay nodes. For this we need some recommendations on what setup is needed as a minimum to be actually useful for the network. I've run a relay node on a dedicated server which seems to be quite a bit of overkill, preferably it would run on as cheap a vps as possible. I've been checking on metrics.torproject.org on stats for my own node, is that the best way to monitor the nodes? If this doesn't seem worthwhile pursuing, please let me know why and I'll stop. Cheers sqrrm

3 2

Relay operators meetup @ CSOA Forte Prenestino, Rome, Italy
by Vasilis 13 Mar '18

13 Mar '18

Dear relay operators and *Tor people, A number of people will participate this Thursday Thursday 15/03/18, 18:30 @ CSOA Forte Prenestino in Rome, Italy [1]. Hope to see many of you there. [1] https://blog.torproject.org/events/relay-operators-meetup-csoa-forte-prenes… Cheers, ~Vasilis -- Fingerprint: 8FD5 CF5F 39FC 03EB B382 7470 5FBF 70B1 D126 0162 Pubkey: https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x5FBF70B1D1260162

1 0

Experimental DoS mitigation is in tor master
by Roger Dingledine 11 Mar '18

11 Mar '18

Hi folks, Thanks for your patience with the relay overload issues. We've merged https://bugs.torproject.org/24902 into tor git master. We'll be putting out an 0.3.3.2-alpha release in not too long for wider testing, and eventually backporting it all the way back to 0.2.9, but if you're the sort who enjoys running code from git, now is a great time to try it and let us know of problems and/or successes. Here's the changelog stanza: o Major features: - Give relays some defenses against the recent network overload. We start with three defenses (default parameters in parentheses). First: if a single client address makes too many connections (>100), hang up on further connections. Second: if a single client address makes circuits too quickly (more than 3 per second, with an allowed burst of 90) while also having too many connections open (3), refuse new create cells for the next while (1-2 hours). Third: if a client asks to establish a rendezvous point to you directly, ignore the request. These defenses can be manually controlled by new torrc options, but relays will also take guidance from consensus parameters, so there's no need to configure anything manually. Implements ticket 24902. To repeat that last part: there are a bunch of torrc options you can use to tweak stuff, but you can leave it all at the defaults and it will read its instructions out of the consensus parameters: https://consensus-health.torproject.org/#consensusparams Woo, --Roger

12 22

2 entries in tor relay search
by peter.zehetner＠liwest.at 11 Mar '18

11 Mar '18

OK, thank you. Then I let it as it is. Peter The "UbuntuCoreNNN" one is "tor-middle-relay" snap. You can remove it if you are managing your own tor. Incidentally, tor-middle-relay snap is being updated right now to v0.3.1.10. You need not do anything. Updates are automatic. On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 11:45 PM, <peter.zehetner(a)liwest.at mailto:peter.zehetner@liwest.at > wrote: > > I've installed tor and the relay via ubuntu-software. > > Did you install a Snap package of "tor-middle-relay"? > > > > On Mar 10, 2018 23:38, <peter.zehetner(a)liwest.at mailto:peter.zehetner@liwest.at > wrote: > > > > > > Hello! > > > > Can anybody explain this: > > > > Peter > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > tor-relays mailing list > > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > > -- Chad Miller http://chad.org gpg:a806deac30420066 _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

1 0

2 entries in tor relay search
by peter.zehetner＠liwest.at 11 Mar '18

11 Mar '18

I've installed tor and the relay via ubuntu-software. Did you install a Snap package of "tor-middle-relay"? On Mar 10, 2018 23:38, <peter.zehetner(a)liwest.at mailto:peter.zehetner@liwest.at > wrote: > > Hello! > > Can anybody explain this: > > Peter > > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > > _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

2 1

2 entries in tor relay search
by peter.zehetner＠liwest.at 11 Mar '18

11 Mar '18

Hello! Can anybody explain this: Peter

2 1

FreeBSD 11.1 ZFS Tor Image
by Conrad Rockenhaus 10 Mar '18

10 Mar '18

Hello All, If anyone is interested, I have a RAW image of a FreeBSD 11.1 ZFS image that is fully configured and ready to run Tor. Right now it's an eight GB image, but I'm reducing the size by removing all of the extra stuff on it from the upgrade from FreeBSD 11 to 11.1. If you're interested in the image let me know. This image has been fully tested on OVH's Openstack infrastructure, so if you're interested in running it on their infrastructure, let me know and I can walk you through it, or you're more than welcome to host is within my cloud at cost (it's a low monthly rate and unlimited bandwidth). Regards, Conrad Rockenhaus

15 38

Cloud question
by Arisbe 10 Mar '18

10 Mar '18

Gentlemen / Ladies, Simple question: Do Tor middle relays and bridges work on cloud systems? Thanks for the intelligence.

2 2

DoS mitigation taking hold!
by starlight.2017q4＠binnacle.cx 07 Mar '18

07 Mar '18

Back to normal! Check out the final two log entries. Thank you David Goulet and all the Tor devs!!! Feb 24 22:45 Tor 0.3.3.2-alpha (...) running on Linux with . . . . . . Mar 2 21:09 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 247305/247482 TAP, 4620773/4622133 NTor. Mar 3 03:09 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 969715/1129528 TAP, 5195458/5196319 NTor. Mar 3 09:09 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 1847030/2202846 TAP, 5027827/5029068 NTor. Mar 3 13:24 Tor 0.3.3.3-alpha (...) running on Linux with . . . Mar 3 19:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 93572/93573 TAP, 5009863/5010456 NTor. Mar 4 01:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 169018/262021 TAP, 4539061/4539069 NTor. Mar 4 07:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 169753/235140 TAP, 4436073/4436112 NTor. Mar 4 13:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 119517/119547 TAP, 4040264/4041342 NTor. Mar 4 19:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 1098774/1119662 TAP, 4087379/4088944 NTor. Mar 5 01:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 223758/267280 TAP, 3828115/3828568 NTor. Mar 5 07:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 99975/113118 TAP, 3537541/3537974 NTor. Mar 5 13:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 173710/175951 TAP, 3792871/3793745 NTor. Mar 5 19:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 657254/747645 TAP, 3678773/3679332 NTor. Mar 6 01:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 606685/704653 TAP, 3186116/3186477 NTor. Mar 6 07:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 582036/708742 TAP, 2043464/2043654 NTor. Mar 6 13:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 54266/54266 TAP, *** 586327/586328 NTor. *** Mar 6 19:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 122817/122817 TAP, *** 558229/558231 NTor. ***

1 0

Exit Relay
by Gary 06 Mar '18

06 Mar '18

Hello. I have configured my relay (jaffacakemonster2) to be non exit, however arm shows me the following (I edited out IPs' & some lines after copy/paste from connection screen for others security / brevity) Connections (1878 inbound, 2113 outbound, 19 exit, 1 control) IP --> <scrubbed>:443 (HTTPS) UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:443 (HTTPS) UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:443 (HTTPS) UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:443 (HTTPS) UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.4m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:4000 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:9001 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:9001 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:9001 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:9001 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.4m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:9001 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 1.0m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:26155 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) Atlas reports the flags Fast, Running & Valid. Lines as copied & pasted from torrc: ## Uncomment this if you do *not* want your relay to allow any exit traffic. ## (Relays allow exit traffic by default.) ExitRelay 0 What is going on here? I am confused as to why there is exit connections but I am not / dont want an exit relay. Thanks.

4 12