- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Thoughts about potentially abusive config option for exit nodes
by abuse-node49＠posteo.de 03 Oct '22

03 Oct '22

I did not manage to find anywhere on the new website the current config options of the torrc. So I ask the question here, although it may be already outdated. This is the third time I have had contact with the police about Exits Relays. That's why it occurred to me that someone might be acting targeted, because I run more than one node. Looking for configurations that allow dedicated IP addresses, I found the torrc-config option 'StrictNodes 1' in conjunction with 'ExitNodes [IP/Nickname/Key]' on the web. There were also hints that something had been changed before, but I tried it on a local installation. The goal was to use a specific exit address. StrictNodes 1 ExitNodes [MY_EXIT_NODE_IP] First I had a typo and the Tor service did not start. After the correction it worked and I got into the network. The conclusion remained that Tor accepts these configuration lines. The problem with this is, should this config line really allow a dedicated exit as the sole exit point into the network, the operator of that exit could be targeted and harmed with illegal traffic. In Metrics it is easy to show whole Tor families that always belong to a single operator. It would be nice if the developers remove the possibility to specify a dedicated IP address/nickname/key, if not already done. The config option 'Exitnodes {COUNTRY_CODE}' should remain though. Kind regards, Olaf

1 0

bridge distribution
by potlatch 28 Sep '22

28 Sep '22

[0] FB45183DD82D572CA2B2641C1AB0EB0D8CE7B858 Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.

3 2

bridge distribution
by potlatch 24 Sep '22

24 Sep '22

People, I have a bridge [0] with a bridge distribution mechanism of "non". It's been that way since May 2022. What gives? Should I remove it from the network as unless> potlatch Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.

1 0

Best practices for the hosting provider of Tor exit nodes?
by Isaac Grover, Aileron I.T. 15 Sep '22

15 Sep '22

Good afternoon, As I'm reaching out to hosting providers worldwide to see if hosting Tor exit nodes is within their ToS and AUP, most hosting providers are requesting hardware specifications and bandwidth requirements; however, I would like to point them to a resource showing best practices for the hosting provider, and maybe one that shows expectations of the Tor exit node operator as well - for example SWIP'ing the IP address(es) to the exit node operator - so that the hosting provider knows what the exit node operator expects of them, and what they should expect of the exit node operator. Does such a resource exist, and if not, what would you request/add in such a resource? Make your day great, Isaac Grover

1 0

knock knock, police is here
by volker.mink＠gmx.de 13 Sep '22

13 Sep '22

Hi folks. On Tuesday morning police knocked on my door, performing a full house search. Some Nazis used TOR to send nazi-emails to several schools in Germany. Unfortunately their mails left one of my Exit Servers from dark- to clearweb, so an ip address, registered on my name, was the last stamp. Now im accused of Volksverhetzung (german, try to find a good translation). It means spreading bad nazi bullshit to the internet. I can take this down by showing them German Telemediengesetz §8, which protects TOR operators in Germany. Unfortunately they found some dope (yea, 420guy here) during the house search, which makes thing even more complicated. Now I am considering shutting down all my exits. I promise you guys, there is nothing more bad than a police house search in the early morning hourse. Even a burglary would be less worse. Burglars come, steal, go and you never hear again from them. Police comes, searches through all your belongings, destroys your privacy, is allowed to take ALL what they want - and they will send you bad bad letters afterwards. What are your thoughts about this? Best regards, volker

5 6

a characteristic of recent attacks?
by Scott Bennett 01 Sep '22

01 Sep '22

The vast majority of recent surges of unusual activity on my humble relay, which I take as likely being attacks, result in large changes in the hour-to-hour statistic shown below in these lines extracted from the hourly heartbeat message groups. Aug 31 19:02:28.549 [notice] Heartbeat: DoS mitigation since startup: 15 circuits killed with too many cells, 0 circuits rejected, 0 marked addresses, 14 same address concurrent connections rejected, 0 connections rejected, 5 single hop clients refused, 1706742 INTRODUCE2 rejected. Aug 31 20:02:28.546 [notice] Heartbeat: DoS mitigation since startup: 15 circuits killed with too many cells, 0 circuits rejected, 0 marked addresses, 14 same address concurrent connections rejected, 0 connections rejected, 5 single hop clients refused, 1706742 INTRODUCE2 rejected. Aug 31 21:02:28.549 [notice] Heartbeat: DoS mitigation since startup: 15 circuits killed with too many cells, 0 circuits rejected, 0 marked addresses, 14 same address concurrent connections rejected, 0 connections rejected, 5 single hop clients refused, 1706742 INTRODUCE2 rejected. Aug 31 22:02:28.544 [notice] Heartbeat: DoS mitigation since startup: 15 circuits killed with too many cells, 0 circuits rejected, 0 marked addresses, 14 same address concurrent connections rejected, 0 connections rejected, 5 single hop clients refused, 1770970 INTRODUCE2 rejected. Aug 31 23:02:28.556 [notice] Heartbeat: DoS mitigation since startup: 16 circuits killed with too many cells, 0 circuits rejected, 0 marked addresses, 14 same address concurrent connections rejected, 0 connections rejected, 5 single hop clients refused, 2013266 INTRODUCE2 rejected. The most recent such surge appears to have ended less than an hour ago. Note that there was no change in the count of "INTRODUCE2 rejected" for many hours leading up to the onset of unusual activity, though I've only shown three prior hours' worth. Then there is an increase of 63227 in this count during the first hour and another 41296 during the second hour. Often during these periods the input appears to be maxed out, and sometimes the output rate is still higher by several hundred KB/s. My question is, do other relay operators whose relays are being attacked see the same phenomenon? In addition, if someone knows of an effective way to turn such things aside at less cost than be simply leaving them to tor to deal with, I'd love to know about it, too, though I suspect there may be no such method. Thanks in advance for any relevant information! Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ********************************************************************** * Internet: bennett at sdf.org *xor* bennett at freeshell.org * *--------------------------------------------------------------------* * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * * -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * **********************************************************************

2 2

One of my relays does not get a "consensus weight" value and is not in the list.
by failing.flyaway443＠mailer.me 30 Aug '22

30 Aug '22

Hello everyone, I have a question about another relay I deployed a few days ago. This time I set up two relays on a server with only one IP address, almost simultaneously. They are "Infinity1" and "Infinity2". I kept looking at the Relay Search to see how everything was going, and Infinity1 already has a consensus weight of 36000, but Infinity2's value is still at 1. So I looked at the big consensus list, and sure enough, it only has Infinity1 in it. Could it be that the Directory Authorities do not accept Infinity2 for some reason, or should I just be patient a bit longer? I also noticed that Infinity1 is already moving an average of 15Mb/s of traffic, while Infinity2 is still hanging around in the Kb range. Of course I did everything correctly, MyFamily and ContactInfo are set. Does anyone here know what this could be? The fingerprint of Infinity2 is 9F459D4756AA61D7ED05D000EA4C757FA19AC401. Thank you everyone for taking the time to think about this for a moment and have a great day to you all! Best

1 1

OOM Bytes Cell
by Nyasaki Server 29 Aug '22

29 Aug '22

Hi, my node is running for a while now, today I noticed that the cell oom bytes has risen, which never happened before. Is this concerning? What does the cell value mean? Im thankful for every input! BR Nyasaki

1 0

Closing relay
by Ole Rydahl 29 Aug '22

29 Aug '22

Since 2014 I have run a non-exit relay at my premises. However ultimo July the system load increased abruptly. Idle-cpu -typically 60-70% - dropped to 30%, _and_ with frequent drops to 0! I reduced the max bandwidth to 1.2 Mbytes. That reduces the load somewhat but still with frequent spikes where the idle-cpu hits 0 and I get the "relay too slow" indication. Any suggestions? /Ole Rydahl https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/CE1FD7659F2DFE92B883083C0C6C9 74616D17F3D

2 1

Overload
by sysmanager7 27 Aug '22

27 Aug '22

Another New one: 19:01:09 [NOTICE] General overload -> Ntor dropped (176948) fraction 25.2668% is above threshold of 0.5000% â 17:19:32 [WARN] Your computer is too slow to handle this many circuit creation requests! Please consider using the MaxAdvertisedBandwidth â config option or choosing a more restricted exit policy. Any Ideas?? What is the syntax for MaxAdvertisedBandwidth? Currently is: MaxAdvertisedBandwidth 3Mb Sysmanager Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.

1 0