- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Docker Snowflake Proxy Multiple IPs
by admin＠likogan.dev 02 Oct '24

02 Oct '24

Hello, I'm writing because I want to run a snowflake proxy in a docker container on a server with two IP addresses; the primary public IP I want the snowflake proxy hosted on, and a public anycast IP that's shared between other servers. I'm concerned the snowflake proxy may try listening on the anycast IP, which will cause problems as this IP is shared between a few servers! >From my understanding, a snowflake proxy should use the "host" network option with docker. How can I specify which IP address to use with this option? Thanks, Likogan

2 1

Exit relay not in consensus
by denny.obreham＠a-n-o-n-y-m-e.net 01 Oct '24

01 Oct '24

My exit relay which has been running for months without a problem has not been in the cached consensus for days now. https://consensus-health.torproject.org/consensus-health.html?#7BDDE0E7 607A5F49578768F44CD721793FA2D7AE After investigating, I thought the reason was that the IPv6 wasn't reachable anymore. It happened once before with another relay. Seems to be a problem with my ISP. Anyway, I just remove the ORPort IPv6 address and IPv6Exit flag from the torrc file and everything should return to normal. It has been days and it doesn't. Reloaded and restarted more than once since then. What I don't understand is that the OR IPv6 address and the ReachableIPv6 flag are still listed in the metrics. https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/7BDDE0E7607A5F49578768F4 4CD721793FA2D7AE Any help would be appreciated.

2 1

relays and CUPS vulnerabilities
by George 30 Sep '24

30 Sep '24

There are some very significant recent CVEs out for CUPS, the unix printing system. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=cups It's an ideal moment to remind relay operators that a Tor node, relay or bridge, should be a single-purpose internet server. Running alternate internet services is a bad idea. The node should have the minimum packages installed for the purpose of running a node. More packages means more possible vulnerabilities. Needless to say, a CUPS server listening on 631/tcp or 631/udp while providing Tor access is a bad idea. g -- 43C2 85B0 41B6 4AC1 0E02 2767 7092 AEB3 40B0 C804

3 3

Relay disconnect & offline on IP change
by Tor Relay Net Ops 26 Sep '24

26 Sep '24

Greetings fellow relay operators! I'm currently running a tor relay on a dynamic IP Address connection, usually my ISP gives me a new address every day or so- Lately [for the past like week or so- /can't remember when it started happening/], I have to manually restart it when my WAN IP Address changes; to get the relay back online- (systemctl restart tor@default) Is there a way to not manually restart tor (besides running a cron script to do so) Below are my tor configuration: Tor 0.4.8.12 on Linux Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm) /etc/tor/torrc Nickname hadleyJamison ContactInfo url:darrenofficial.com proof:dns-rsa ciissversion:2mailto:tor-relay-netops@darrenofficial.com ORPort 88 IPv4Only ExitRelay 0 SocksPort 0 ControlPort 9051 CookieAuthentication 1 RelayBandwidthRate 69 MBits RelayBandwidthBurst 69 MBits -darren

6 6

Dear OBFS4 bridge operators, please enable timing and packet-size obfuscations to help clients facing timing analysis attacks.
by George Hartley 25 Sep '24

25 Sep '24

Hello Tor community, this e-mail applies to you if you are running an obfs4 (now known under the name lyrebird) bridge or want to do so in the future. Some recent posts on this list has shown that traffic timing analysis can be used to locate a users or onion services guard nodes or bridges. This is not really something new. For bridge users, there is a way to try to protect themselves against this, but your bridge configuration must support it. By enabling iat-mode on your obfs4 /lyrebird bridge, then maybe DPI (Deep Packet Inspection) hardware can sometimes be defeated either entirely, or at least the process of tracking users can be slowed down. OBFS4/Lyrebird support two times of traffic obfuscation: > ServerTransportOptions obfs4 iat-mode=1 This will make your bridge send MTU sized packets, in order to make true packet size analysis harder. There is also what the author of obfs4/Lyrebird called "paranoid mode": > ServerTransportOptions obfs4 iat-mode=2 For each write, a variable length packet will be sent, which will result in both making true packet size and round trip time analysis harder. If your bridge is distributed by BridgeDB, the next time someone receives a batch of bridges with your bridge in it, the bridge-line will have the iat-mode variable set to the one you set on your bridge server. Your bridge will still work even if you enable these defenses and a user chooses to set iat-mode to 0 in his bridge line. There is a small performance penalty for both mode 1 and 2, but nothing very severe. I believe this, along with Vanguards, and so on, is needed to keep users and services somewhat secure. Let me know what you think. - George

5 8

Looking for a ipv4 block and strategy
by Osservatorio Nessuno 24 Sep '24

24 Sep '24

Hi everyone, our organization is working to add more physical nodes, in our little Italy headquarter[1]. We have reached an agreement with one of the available fiber reseller there, where we will pay for L2 transport to a datacenter, where we will buy our uplink separately and announce and route our public IP addresses independently. It is actually a very nice opportunity to remove a point of trust in the chain and get back control to a part of infrastructure that is usually delegated to commercial ISP. Similarly, as this list knows well, by announcing our IPs we will be the direct recipients of any abuse. We have now two options: either look for someone willing to lease a /24 to Tor operators, which is not an easy task since the block reputation will be tainted and depreciate the block. We have found someone willing to, for $119/mo, but it is hard to tell how long that will last. An alternative would be to buy it, for around ~7k$ (~28-31$ per IP, via a broker). We do not have the budget for this now, but an organization member has offered to lease the money and get paid back without interest at a similar rate that a lease would cost (around $1k year). In all phases, the block will be in the org ownership. We have someone who can LIR sponsor at RIPE so we would not have other recurring expenses. Buying is more sustainable in the long-term: in around 6 years we will stop to have to pay the lease. At the same time, we will not have any chances to change those IP ever later, while in a lease, we could eventually move to other blocks. Does anybody in the community have contacts for lease or sale? Is there any foreseeable issue in sticking to the same range for the next ~10 years? Especially at the beginning, it will be unlikely that we will use even 1/4 of them, but given how the fiber infrastructure is built, we can eventually use the same announcements even for other physical locations. Thank you [1] - https://osservatorionessuno.org/blog/2024/07/we-have-a-headquarter-and-it-i…

2 2

Why I do have so often an "8" in my bridge stats?
by Toralf Förster 24 Sep '24

24 Sep '24

Never cared about this before, but isn't the "8" too often here? : $ cat ~/tmp/tor_bridge_stats i10 bridge-ips ru=264,br=16,de=16,us=16,au=8,cl=8,co=8,cz=8,dz=8,eg=8,es=8,fr=8,gb=8,gr=8,hk=8,id=8,in=8,ir=8,it=8,kr=8,lt=8,lv=8,nl=8,ph=8,sa=8,sg=8,tw=8,ua=8,ve=8 i11 bridge-ips ru=152,ir=16,cn=8,cz=8,de=8,gb=8,nl=8,pl=8,tr=8 i12 bridge-ips ru=224,by=8,cn=8,de=8,fr=8,in=8,ir=8,jp=8,nl=8,pl=8,ro=8,us=8 i13 bridge-ips de=8 i14 bridge-ips de=8,fr=8,ru=8 i15 bridge-ips de=8,ru=8 i20 bridge-ips de=8 i21 bridge-ips de=8 i22 bridge-ips ru=96,at=8,de=8,nl=8,pl=8,us=8 i23 bridge-ips ru=904,ir=48,eg=32,de=24,us=24,fr=16,ae=8,at=8,be=8,br=8,by=8,ca=8,co=8,cz=8,dz=8,fi=8,gb=8,gr=8,hk=8,hu=8,im=8,in=8,it=8,jp=8,kz=8,lv=8,ma=8,md=8,mm=8,na=8,ni=8,nl=8,pk=8,pl=8,sa=8,se=8,tm=8,tr=8,tz=8,uz=8,ve=8,ye=8,za=8 i24 bridge-ips de=8 i25 bridge-ips ru=112,ch=8,cn=8,de=8,gh=8,in=8,ir=8,ke=8,mm=8,mu=8,nl=8,tr=8,us=8 i26 bridge-ips de=8 luchs bridge-ips de=8 -- Toralf

2 3

Read/written bytes on a relay differ
by Richie 23 Sep '24

23 Sep '24

Hi everyone, nothing of real concern, but out of curiosity: since some years now i use overhead traffic on my ISP for Tor, with a small home relay burning some 3 to 4 MB/Sec. Usual middle relay plus V2Dir (and HSdir some days after last reboot). Since some weeks now, the read/written bytes differ quite significantly, and i never experieced sth like that for a relevant timespan before. Is this a sign of more "reading directory services" on the relay? (maybe short reqests and verbose replys), some new kind of attack, whatever? direct metrics-Link via https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/11FC7D9C7D8DF74326B90EC71C10… and screenie attached. Again, no big issue, just curiosity. And if its some kind of bug, i'd be happy to hand over more info. thx to everyone maintaining and running this stuff, Richie

2 1

[Important] Update on an upcoming German broadcasting story about Tor/Onion Services
by isabela fernandes 19 Sep '24

19 Sep '24

Hi Tor, I am reaching out to inform you of an upcoming news story concerning a potential deanonymization attack on Onion Services. What is happening? On September 9, 2024, The Tor Project received a press inquiry from Norddeutscher Rundfunk (NDR, part of ARD, a German public broadcaster) with a request for comment to their upcoming reporting of "investigative measures by German and international law enforcement agencies in the Tor network, in particular the localisation and deanonymisation of onion services." We complied with the outlet's deadline of September 12th and answered a series of questions. The reporter claims to have "evidence that shows that in several cases German law enforcement authorities were able to locate the Tor entry node of onion services and thus successfully deanonymise Tor users. V2 and V3 onion addresses were affected at least between Q3/2019 and Q2/2021." The reporter further claims that "law enforcement agencies used so-called timing analyses and broad and long-term monitoring of Tor nodes in data centres." As of today, The Tor Project has not been granted access to supporting documents, and has not been able to independently verify if this claim is true, if the attack took place, how it was carried out, and who was involved. In the absence of facts, it is hard for us to issue any official guidance or responsible disclosures to the Tor community, relay operators, and users at this time. We are calling for more information from you. If you have any information that can help us learn more about this alleged attack, please email security(a)torproject.org. If you want to encrypt your mail, you can get the OpenPGP public key for this address from keys.openpgp.org. Fingerprint: 835B 4E04 F6F7 4211 04C4 751A 3EF9 EF99 6604 DE41 Your assistance will help all of us take the necessary steps and precautions to keep Onion Services safe for the millions of users that rely on the protections Tor provides. Are Tor users safe? Tor users can continue to use Tor Browser to access the web securely and anonymously. Nothing that the Tor Project has learned about this incident suggests that Tor Browser was attacked or exploited. We encourage Tor Browser users and relay operators to keep software versions up to date. The reporter's questions focus on the use of onion services and .onion addresses. Which leads us to assume that the alleged attack was targeting a specific .onion site. We will continue to share updates on this email as this situation evolves. Thank you! Isabela

9 10

[warn] Error relaying cell across rendezvous; closing circuits
by Logforme 16 Sep '24

16 Sep '24

I run the non-exit relay 8F6A78B1EA917F2BF221E87D14361C050A70CCC3 Today I noticed two [warn] lines in the Tor log file that I have not seen before: [warn] Error relaying cell across rendezvous; closing circuits [warn] circuit_mark_for_close_(): Bug: Duplicate call to circuit_mark_for_close at ../src/core/or/command.c:577 (first at ../src/core/or/relay.c:343) (on Tor 0.4.8.12 ) I assume this is more of a FYI for the developers than for me as an operator. I'll keep an eye out to see if they appear more times.

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] tor-relays Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10
by Account Etheron 14 Sep '24

14 Sep '24

Your node has low Consensus Weight. Also your node is not marked as "Fast" Normal that happens between a week. Also advertised traffic is very low. https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/A00E3AAF5A24DC69740FA7A3A1C4… Low Consensus Weight (like 11) could be due to several factors: 1. *Low Bandwidth*: If your node has a limited bandwidth or is not properly configured to advertise its available bandwidth, it might get a lower weight. 2. *Unstable or Intermittent Availability*: Nodes that are frequently going offline or showing unstable behavior will have a lower consensus weight. 3. *Geolocation or Restrictions*: Certain regions or configurations may cause your node to have reduced visibility or reliability in the eyes of Tor's directory authorities. To improve the consensus weight of a Tor node: - Ensure *high uptime* and a reliable internet connection. - Advertise higher *bandwidth* if available. - Make sure your node is properly configured with the *right ports and keys*. Regards. On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 2:00 PM <tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org> wrote: > Send tor-relays mailing list submissions to > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > tor-relays-owner(a)lists.torproject.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of tor-relays digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Relay suddenly pushing very little traffic (Zachary) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 12:23:52 +0000 > From: Zachary <secure-communications-zachary(a)protonmail.ch> > To: "tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org" > <tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org> > Subject: [tor-relays] Relay suddenly pushing very little traffic > Message-ID: > > <jOspt2hq9xeYGyZ8fsFy_qO_4d_TtxrOmCJxPIPzAyF948JHR0_2saC8hGGKPkleMwcLMFcXbPVucHhRfnXLZfBjn_Wx2VYGC46r1wpqnaI=@ > protonmail.ch> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hello all, > > I am the operator of relay AS11796EntryMiddle. > > This is a strategically placed relay on a 106.4 mbps internet connection > with no fluctuations in bandwidth available to it. The relay has very good > peering to major backbone providers such as Arelion which allows many > people to access it with minimal network hops, which is why I host it in > that ISP?s network. > > Over the past six months, I typically saw traffic ranging between 15 and > 70mbps. Now suddenly the relay seemingly can?t efficiently process traffic, > the advertised bandwidth has tanked, and it?s pushing virtually no data. > > I am running Tor 4.8.12 installed from the official Tor repositories in > Ubuntu 22.04 with OR port 9001. The entire network is an EdgeRouter plugged > into WAN and then a firewall rule letting traffic hit the host for Tor. The > relay is indeed working, but everyday it seems that less and less traffic > is getting through (this is very evident on Tor metrics.) TCP connections > are not exhausted so I?m pretty confused what?s going on. > > Any thoughts? Not trying to waste anyone?s time just don?t want this relay > to go to waste. > > Thanks, > Zachary >

1 0

Relay suddenly pushing very little traffic
by Zachary 13 Sep '24

13 Sep '24

Hello all, I am the operator of relay AS11796EntryMiddle. This is a strategically placed relay on a 106.4 mbps internet connection with no fluctuations in bandwidth available to it. The relay has very good peering to major backbone providers such as Arelion which allows many people to access it with minimal network hops, which is why I host it in that ISP’s network. Over the past six months, I typically saw traffic ranging between 15 and 70mbps. Now suddenly the relay seemingly can’t efficiently process traffic, the advertised bandwidth has tanked, and it’s pushing virtually no data. I am running Tor 4.8.12 installed from the official Tor repositories in Ubuntu 22.04 with OR port 9001. The entire network is an EdgeRouter plugged into WAN and then a firewall rule letting traffic hit the host for Tor. The relay is indeed working, but everyday it seems that less and less traffic is getting through (this is very evident on Tor metrics.) TCP connections are not exhausted so I’m pretty confused what’s going on. Any thoughts? Not trying to waste anyone’s time just don’t want this relay to go to waste. Thanks, Zachary

1 0

Supporting TOR: Seeking Affordable and Reliable Server Providers in Eastern Europe
by coal_norm_0v＠icloud.com 12 Sep '24

12 Sep '24

Hello everyone, I’ve been a fan of Tor for many years now, and my affinity for anonymity naturally extends to other interests, such as Monero… 😉 I’ve successfully rallied like-minded individuals who have generously supported our cause through various grants, and we’ve even received a government subsidy from the Czech Republic to promote freedom of speech in oppressive regimes. With a substantial sum of money at our disposal, we’ve chosen to allocate a portion to support the TOR project. Currently, we operate around 60 servers. Our main challenge, unsurprisingly, is with exit servers. Convincing providers to overlook automatic complaint notifications has proven quite tricky. From our original 30 exit nodes, we’re down to about 5—the rest had to be shifted to relay nodes. We could switch them to well-known operators like RDP.sh, but they already host a large number of exit nodes, and we prefer to encourage network diversity. We’ve initiated something akin to a cost-sharing model for enabling our servers to run exit nodes, but it hasn’t made a significant impact. We want to spend our funds wisely to support Tor. Do any of you have suggestions for good, affordable providers in less conventional locations (e.g., Eastern Europe like Poland, Hungary, Ukraine)? Thanks for any ideas, Alex https://tor.foundation

5 5

Artikel 5 e.V. - Another police raid in Germany - general assembly on Sep 21st 2024
by Artikel 5 e.V. 09 Sep '24

09 Sep '24

Hello to all list-reading entities! On Aug 16th 2024 German police considered it once again appropriate to raid the home&office at the registered address of our organization. The first raid was 2017. There are obviously still people working in German law enforcement today, who think that harassing a node-operator NGO would somehow lead to the de-anonymization of individual tor users. At least that is what they claim in the paperwork. As with the first time, the raid team was fortunately a bit better educated and acted significantly more reasonable than the non-technical people applying for the raid and the judge signing it off. So again, no hardware was seized. Apart from one burnt (middle relay) node and some billing paperwork for the exit node this was all about, the team left the house after one and a half hours with mostly empty hands. We intend to legally challenge the search warrant to make sure that this does not happen again (but this is not what this email here is about). These were once again one and a half hours with armed police in a personal living room, threatening to de-facto kill a livelihood and software business (carrying a truckload hardware away) of an non-profit board member to force cooperation. As a consequence, I am personally no longer willing to provide my personal address&office-space as registered address for our non-profit/NGO as long as we risk more raids by running exit nodes. That is a risk I am just no longer willing to take anymore. Artikel 5 e.V. is now calling for a general assembly on Sep 21st 2024. We are looking for new board members (who take over and organize a new registered address and keep running exits) or discuss ALL alternative options. These options include "just stop running exits" or even the most drastic step of liquidating the entire organization and distribution of the remaining budget to other German organizations (that would have to qualify under our non-profit by-laws). Assembly time&location details can be found at https://artikel5ev.de/ We intend to provide a stream primarily for our members but also for interested parties who can not attend in person. The event/stream will however be in German only. Details for the stream will be made available on the website on short notice before the event starts. If you plan to attend in person, an upfront email would be appreciated, so we can pick the right room to set things up. Thank you! Regards, Gero Kühn for Artikel 5 e.V.

3 2

Next Tor Relay Operator Meetup - September 7th, 2024 at 19UTC
by gus 08 Sep '24

08 Sep '24

Hi, Save the date: the next Tor Relay Operator will happen Saturday, September 7th, 2024 at 19 UTC! We're still working on the agenda for this meetup, however feel free to add your topics directly to this pad or just reply to the mailing list: https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-relayop-sept7th-meetup-keep ## Agenda 1. Announcements 2. 2024 Elections & Anti-censorship news 3. Network health updates - New Metrics Network Status API 4. OTF relay operator survey summary/presentation 5. Questions & Answers <add your question below> ## How to join us Meetup details: - Room link: https://tor.meet.coop/gus-og0-x74-dzn - When: September 7th, 2024 - 19.00 UTC - Duration: 60 to 90 minutes - Tor Code of Conduct: https://community.torproject.org/policies/code_of_conduct/ - Registration: No need for a registration or anything else, just use the room-linkabove. We will open the room 10 minutes before. cheers, Gus -- The Tor Project Community Team Lead

3 5

simple instructions to the expiredkey issue, pls.?
by code9n＠pm.me 06 Sep '24

06 Sep '24

Hi, I know I should have sorted this some weeks ago but can anyone tell me a simple method of dealing with the: bullseye InRelease: The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 74A941BA219EC810 deb.torproject.org archive signing key issue, please? Thanks.

4 4

Bridge node configurations and where to find them (semi quote)
by Alessandro Greco 30 Aug '24

30 Aug '24

Dear all, In the past, I set up a middle relay node, and today I am looking to experiment with configuring a Bridge node to support the Tor project and its community. Since this is a very sensitive task, I decided to reach out to you to ensure that the setup is correct and that the configuration does not pose any risks to users who connect. First, I will summarize the `torrc` configuration file (I have removed the ports as they differ from the standard ones): ``` BridgeRelay 1 ORPort <port> ServerTransportPlugin obfs4 exec /usr/bin/obfs4proxy ServerTransportListenAddr obfs4 0.0.0.0:<port> ExtORPort auto ExitPolicy reject *:* ``` I have set two limits on the connections: ``` BandwidthRate 300 MBytes # I want to determine how much bandwidth I can allocate without impacting my network usage. IPv4Only ``` As for the information settings, I have used the usual `ContactInfo` and `Nickname`. While reading the `torrc` documentation, I discovered the Sandbox feature, which is still in development. In this regard, I would like to ask whether using experimental features like this on Bridge nodes is advisable or not. Personally, I would find a feature like this very useful. Should an anti DDoS system be configured? I wanted to ask how I can further contribute to the Tor Project's research, as I have read that there are "Statistics" features that allow the collection of useful information for the developer community. I have two main questions about this: 1. Is it advisable to use experimental features or those that collect information on a Bridge node (assuming there is a difference between a Bridge, a Guard/Middle relay, and an Exit Node)? 2. If the answer to the first question is yes, what are all the features that I can include in the `torrc` file to passively support research within the Tor Project? Finally, I would like to ask what information should be kept confidential when managing a Bridge. For example, I know for sure that it is important to keep the IP address confidential to avoid the risk of being blacklisted, but are there any other pieces of information that need to be protected? To ensure that a Bridge node can be restarted on a different machine, which files need to be preserved? Are they the same as those for a standard relay (i.e., the private key), or are there additional files that need to be securely stored? Thank you for your support and guidance. Best regards, Aleff --- Browse my WebSite: aleff-gitlab.gitlab.io Use my PGP Public Key: pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7CFCE404A2168C85 Join to support: - Free Software Foundation! (my.fsf.org/join?referrer=6202114) - Electronic Frontier Foundation! (eff.org) - Tor-Project (torproject.org) - Signal (signal.org)

3 6

Request for Tor to support armhf architecture
by Landon 30 Aug '24

30 Aug '24

I am running a Raspberry Pi Raspbian OS (debian) mini computer. Tor software does not support this hardware without me having to compile it myself for my platform. Which I don't know how to do. My specific APT error message says this: N: Skipping acquire of configured file 'main/binary-armhf/Packages' as repository 'https://deb.torproject.org/torproject.org bookworm InRelease' doesn't support architecture 'armhf' The Raspberry Pi is a perfect computer to run Tor because it has 8 GB RAM, is tiny, only uses a max of 25 watts of power and works great as a network server. Plus, I don't have to leave my big power hungry desktop computer on all the time to run Tor. Raspberry Pi info page: https://www.raspberrypi.com/products/raspberry-pi-5/ Landon

3 4

a couple noob questions
by observatory123 27 Aug '24

27 Aug '24

Dear fellow relay operators, I've been hosting a tor relay on a VPS (strato) for a couple days now. I've never done this before, so I have a couple of questions: - Is it normal for my relay to only use up only about 2 MB/s after nearly 5 days of uptime despite bandwidth speed tests done with speedtest-cli generally reporting significantly higher bandwidth? - Is it normal for my relay to advertise 7.37 MiB/s on its relay search page despite bandwidth speed tests done with speedtest-cli generally reporting significantly higher bandwidth? - Do I have to mark somewhere that I'm hosting the tor relay on a VPS (which means technically a company also has control over the relay)? - Is this mailing list a good place to ask these questions? Or am I reaching too many people by doing this? When I say I performed a bandwidth test, I mean I performed a bandwidth test with the speedtest-cli debian package. The test generally tells me I have about 217 MB/s download speed and 113 MB/s upload speed. The nickname of my relay is observatory123 and its fingerprint is: 45431BF8AB66C673942C1E344BB520625CE5F817 Kind regards, observatory123

8 9

Re: [tor-relays] [network-health] help metrics torpoject
by George Hartley 21 Aug '24

21 Aug '24

Hi, don't worry, a relay will be removed from metrics 7 days after you shut it down. Sincerely, George On Sunday, August 18th, 2024 at 8:49 AM, kop kop <a5654505(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Good afternoon. how can I delete an entry in https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#search/134 > about fargo node? > I didn’t think twice and deployed this relay from my home network and now I’m afraid of persecution from the authorities. I ask for help.

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] DDOS alerts from my provider
by eff_03675549＠posteo.se 20 Aug '24

20 Aug '24

Hi Rafo, My apologies for the late reply in your request for the code on banning tor exits into *GUARDS or middle-relays* * * * * rm ../../etc/cron.d/updateSSHkey echo "0 0 * * * root wget -P /root/scriptsremote/ https://check.torproject.org/torbulkexitlist" > ../../etc/cron.d/blacklistTORexits echo "1 1 * * * root sed 's/^/-A ufw-before-input -s /; s/$/ -j DROP/' /root/scriptsremote/torbulkexitlist" >> ../../etc/cron.d/blacklistTORexits echo "2 1 * * * root sed -i '/# End required lines/r /root/scriptsremote/torbulkexitlist' /etc/ufw/before.rules" >> ../../etc/cron.d/blacklistTORexits echo "3 1 * * * root rm /root/scriptsremote/torbulkexitlist" >> ../../etc/cron.d/blacklistTORexits apt install -y fail2ban rm ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf touch ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf echo "[sshd]" > ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf echo "enabled = true" >> ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf echo "port = 11218" >> ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf echo "filter = sshd" >> ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf echo "logpath = /var/log/auth.log" >> ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf echo "maxretry = 5" >> ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf echo "bantime = 24h" >> ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf echo "bantime.increment = true" >> ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf echo "bantime.factor = 24" >> ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf echo "bantime.maxtime = 52w" >> ../../etc/fail2ban/jail.d/sshd.conf Here I hope this is well received, Carlos. On 7/10/24 1:19 AM, god-gave-you-mouth-ears-eyes-so-enjoy(a)posteo.net wrote: > > Hi Rafo, > > > I have a pre-defined fail2ban (jail) script that does all the job of > banning any tor-EXIT -dynamically updated via cron- from attempting > access when this helps. > > This is meant for Debian, > > the synthax could do with fedora (perhaps a few code adaptation). > > let me know when this is of interest. > > > Carlos. > > On 7/8/24 7:34 PM, Rafo (r4fo.com) via tor-relays wrote: >> Hi, >> I have been running a relay for a few months now without any >> problems. But this week I’ve received 2 DDoS alerts from my provider >> (Netcup), both are ~3 gigabits. They seem to be coming from other Tor >> relays. >> I’m running an Invidious like instance on my server (which uses >> around 600 megabits) but I have a 2.5 gigabit port. So I configured >> my Tor relay to use 300-400 megabits. >> I’m not sure where that 3 gigabit of data comes from. >> I have lowered my advertised bandwidth to 100 megabits, would that be >> enough to prevent these kind of issues? >> >> >> Kind regards, >> Rafo >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> tor-relays mailing list >> tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > -- > Updated every second week. > > -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- > > xjMEZfy9NxYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAManzdqpnuQkafKwGP49famHD40TRuz3tlk2S > 6x9w7afNP0d1c3QgT09ITlRFUiA8Z29kLWdhdmUteW91LW1vdXRoLWVhcnMtZXll > cy1zby1lbmpveUBwb3N0ZW8ubmV0PsKPBBMWCAA3FiEEEAD7hg5vFuAk80AxAZJk > LcbaZlUFAmX8vTcFCQATxoACGwMECwkIBwUVCAkKCwUWAgMBAAAKCRABkmQtxtpm > VRErAQDPkO6rew8L0fv+YkObGBGL58dxZtWbELZqDjICDi5A6QD/QC4978BycOFq > ZAx/N9ihgNLRm6Sg1EUupAoaVMcDVA7OOARl/L04EgorBgEEAZdVAQUBAQdA0Xrh > XPXwikKTr7amFdFv57VCWtansLWJCnYqFAVWYmADAQgHwn4EGBYIACYWIQQQAPuG > Dm8W4CTzQDEBkmQtxtpmVQUCZfy9OAUJABPGgAIbDAAKCRABkmQtxtpmVfxdAQDL > TRwNnIeZ//Y4kahWP+WWS7qb6EmM1mCtjRc3IadSDgD+Nh1xGFt00AQtG+oMKF/J > GwnLbMda6bMdvCIXN+U1LQw= > =z8PX > -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- -- PGP updated every second week : please actualize our communication every time.

2 1

DMARC helps prevent Tor-exit from being abused for email SPAM.
by boldsuck 20 Aug '24

20 Aug '24

Hi @all, I thought DMARC was unimportant for a small domain, but I played around with it a few days ago. There are some DMARC monitor sites that you can use for free & I was surprised when I saw that in 2-3 days about 1500 emails were sent via my exit subdomains. Then I set DKIM and SPF to strict adkim=s; aspf=s; and DMARC subdomain policy to reject sp=reject; Since then, emails about Tor-exits have dropped to 0 ;-) -- ╰_╯ Ciao Marco! Debian GNU/Linux It's free software and it gives you freedom!

1 0

DDOS alerts from my provider
by Rafo (r4fo.com) 20 Aug '24

20 Aug '24

Hi,I have been running a relay for a few months now without any problems. But this week I’ve received 2 DDoS alerts from my provider (Netcup), both are ~3 gigabits. They seem to be coming from other Tor relays.I’m running an Invidious like instance on my server (which uses around 600 megabits) but I have a 2.5 gigabit port. So I configured my Tor relay to use 300-400 megabits.I’m not sure where that 3 gigabit of data comes from.I have lowered my advertised bandwidth to 100 megabits, would that be enough to prevent these kind of issues?Kind regards,Rafo

6 12

An Internet backbone blocklisted my Tor server!
by Landon 20 Aug '24

20 Aug '24

TL;DR... Write down your Tor server's GATEWAY IP address. if your server goes offline, try tracerouting to your Tor server's gateway IP address as well as your Tor server's IP address! You might be surprised by what you see! And also install MTR... It is helpful!! Here's the detailed explanation on how you can perform MTR command on your computer and server https://support.gcore.com/hc/en-us/articles/19864311353105-How-to-run-MTR-o… Okay, here is what happened... Late last night I tried to log into my VPS where I am running my Tor bridge server. I was unable to connect. It seemed like my server was offline so I filed a ticket with my service provider which is GCore Labs ( https://hosting.gcorelabs.com/ ) (I've been running my Tor bridge on their server for 4 years.) However, I discovered that my server was not actually down. I was able to login to my server using VNC in the control panel. I did some network diagnostics to diagnose my network connectivity problem. Even though my server was running, it was essentially offline. I could not ping or traceroute from my server to 8.8.8.8 or 1.1.1.1. It looked like there was a network outage. I used some looking glass servers to see what was going on as well. Here was what I discovered... From the Internet, I could ping and traceroute my VPS server's gateway (which is one hop away from my server) but if I tried to ping or traceroute using my server's actual IP address then this is where it stopped working. The culprit was Cogent Communications' routers! [AS174] As soon as packets destined for my server's IP address reached Cogent's routers, they were dropped!! However, packets destined for my server's gateway went through! >From what I understand, my server's gateway is the physical machine running my VPS. How can a packet reach my server's gateway, but not reach my server? It's not like the packet was not making it from my gateway to my server. The packets were being dropped at the edge of Cogent's network [AS174]. I also ran a traceroute on Cogents own looking glass server ( https://cogentco.com/en/looking-glass ) and when I used my server's IP, it showed nothing but when I used my gateway IP it worked! Tell me how that is possible if Cogent was not blocking my server's IP address? I sent Cogent an email asking why they were blocking my server's IP address in their routers. By the time they got back to me, my server was back online and was not being blocked. They sent me an email saying that packets going to my server were routing through their network, which by that time they were. What is so interesting about my Tor server that a major network backbone blocks my IP? If you look at my Tor server's usage graphs, you can see where it is periodically offline. Look at the 6 month graph for the average number of connected clients and you will see places where it is not online. https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/4A0B065DB3CF807C6910DFEF6D9C… I bet the reason that my server periodically goes offline is because it is being blocked and not because it is actually offline! Have you ever had this happen to your server? Landon

4 3

Re: [tor-relays] [tor-dev] Fwd: Introducing & Discussing "Reflec-Tor"s as concept | Exit-Relay as Entry-Relay | Tor & Echo | Adding Entry-Relays as Reflec-Tor to Exit-Nodes
by George Hartley 19 Aug '24

19 Aug '24

Hello, > Similar to Briar, even developers of such clients above tell the loss of messages and low reliability of the hidden to hidden path. Some of you might know, that there were use cases with missing messages in a range of 35-45 %. Sorry, but this is just not the case from my experience - it may take a while to fetch the descriptor of the hidden service, but once a TCP connection is established, aka. the ACK packet has been received, there should be no problems with packet-loss, this is one of the core features of TCP: Retransmission on various conditions. I also hosted a hidden IRC server, as well as a Tor hidden service on my grandmothers laptop, to be able to SSH in through Tor and troubleshoot problems. Experienced no packet loss, unless a relay in the circuit suddenly went offline. If you want, I can measure packet loss from various locations (Northern Europe, East Europe, and New York, USA). Also, to improve latency and throughput, you could make the server a one hop hidden server by enabling: > HiddenServiceSingleHopMode This way the looking up the server is faster, but clients remain anonymous using a normal 3-hop circuit. I don't think we need extra code for this, you could just build your app using the programming language of your desire and use the existing network. That's what I was doing with my ~200 user IRC server, and it worked fine, even while being hosted at home at a limited uplink of 15 Mbps, which now got upgraded to 30 Mbps. Unfortunately fiber is not an option, so we have to rely on 60+ years old copper wires maintained by Telecom, I have a quite fancy industrial router with modem software and capabilities, and we still use VDSL2 17a G.Vector (ITU G.993.5). I do however own a virtual machine machine on my friends colocated server at DataWagon, they are very exit friendly, zero abuse so far, I believe they just redirect abuse mails to /dev/null or something.. lol. Anyway, point is that I never encountered packet loss, and even if, the protocol would compensate for it. This became kind of a rant while I'm at work, so if it's not that useful, Im sorry. Regards, George On Wednesday, August 14th, 2024 at 9:12 AM, Sam <alleestrasse100(a)gmail.com> wrote: > System wrote via Tor Project <noreply(a)forum.torproject.org>: > ============================================================ > > Feedback: Please submit the proposal also to tor-dev: tor-dev Info Page > ======================================================================= > > Introducing & Discussing "Reflec-Tor"s as concept | Exit-Relay as Entry-Relay | Tor & Echo | Adding Entry-Relays as Reflec-Tor to Exit-Nodes > > ============================================================================================================================================= > > https://www.reddit.com/r/TOR/comments/1e4te8m/introducing_discussing_reflec… > > ============================================================================================ > > > > ======================== > > ============================================================== > ============================================================== > > Introducing & Discussing "Reflec-Tor"s as concept | Exit-Relay as Entry-Relay | Tor & Echo | Adding Entry-Relays as Reflec-Tor to Exit-Nodes > ============================================================================================================================================ > > > > Tor-Messaging: Introducing & Discussing "Reflec-Tor"s as concept | Exit-Relay as Entry-Relay | > > Hello, > > I think this belongs to this core, general, relay topic-forum, as it is also a development & community issue, request and efford, I post it here into the reddit forum for your core discussion: > > The idea is to add next to Bridges, Relays and Exit-Nodes also "Entry-Nodes" as "Reflec-Tor"(s) to the point of Exit-Nodes. Hence: Exit-Nodes are developed futher to be also an Entry-Node. > > Some may remember when gnutella got hybrid with edonkey and then also with torrent, Mike Stokes from Shareaza did that. > > The idea today, 20 years later, is to add some Echo-capabilities to Tor in regard of the servers for Exit and Entry. > > Vision: Every (updated) Exit-Node is an Echo-Server - For a better Tor-Messaging. > > What does that mean? > > An Echo-Server is a server for chat-messaging to send an incomming message packet again out to all connected clients at the moment. Ping-in and Ping-Out to all. That simple, that's why it is called the Echo. Like a shout in front of a forrest, all connected users can hear and get the (encrypted) shout or message or packet back from the tree wall. > > There are 3 software applications for Echo-Servers: > > - https://github.com/textbrowser/spot-on (Desktop, sercer in the Listener Tab) > > - https://github.com/textbrowser/smokestack (java for Android) > > - https://github.com/textbrowser/spot-on-lite (headless deamon for Linux) > > > Now, the Listener function with ping in and ping out should be implemented within a Tor-Exit-Node. > > When it comes to Tor-Messaging, there are some pathes possible: > > `A) Tor-Chat-Client-Alice - Tor - Internet - Echo-Server - Internet - Tor - Tor-Chat-Client-Bob (Tor-proxied Chat-Server, which only accepts encrypted packets)` > > `B) Tor-Chat-Client-Alice - Echo - Tor - Tor - Echo - Tor-Chat-Client-Bob (Echo Tor-tunneled)` > > `C) Tor-Chat-Client-Alice - Echo-Server - Tor-Chat-Client-Bob (direct connection to Echo-Server with only encypted packets)` > > The request here is to build and develop option A. > > That is just right now also possible, by an Exit-Node of Tor running the Echo-Server-Software on the same machine in parallel. Just the port is different. > > This is an idea for some might be new, but thinking Tor Messaging a bit, it comes quickly to this ideas and better soluttion. > > The way to connect > > `D) Tor-Chat-Client-Alice - Hidden Onion Server v3 - Tor - Tor - Hidden Onion Server v3 - Tor-Chat-Client-Bob` > > is the current given way for clientes like RicoChet Refresh, Quiet or Cwtch. > > Similar to Briar, even developers of such clients above tell the loss of messages and low reliability of the hidden to hidden path. Some of you might know, that there were use cases with missing messages in a range of 35-45 %. Don't quote me on that, but as core developers and community members you might be in contact with those who experience this. > > Furthermore the Messaging clients are not advanced in functionality, nor advanced in strong encryption. > > It would be third a long development way to got that route. > > It is cost effective and needs cappable developers. > > Some project have stamped on and made a workable client, but does that unite all our power in the sense of Tor-Messaging? > > Messaging needs a Vision and Statement from the Tor-Core-Developer team with a discussion in the community in that regard with honor to the individual projects and also with support for their chosen path (Model D). At the same time we have to state that it is as it is, a HTTP-Server in the middle like in Model A is faster than Model D. > > In the graph-path the Echo-Server in the middle handles only encrypted traffic, so it is just like another Relay. We can call it "Reflec-Tor". The only sense it to multiply incomming encrypted packets from one node to all connected nodes. > > With that Idea, the Messenger Spot-On could be used as a Tor-Messenger. > > This Messenger has stong encryption and is full of feature for messaging and also cryptography. > > it is like adding Firefox to Tor-Browsing, when Spot-On is added to Tor-Messaging. > > Something to read at the community forum: > > https://www.reddit.com/r/Spot_On_Encryption/ > > Also there is a Mobile Client for Android, which also connects to Reflec-Tors, find "Smoke" Messenger at F-Droid.org. > > Please, get this right, it is not about a technical view on slow and failing chat-packets to hidden servers, and it is not about those start-up clients using this inside technology, some do a good project. It is about the idea, that an Reflec-Tor mirroring and pinging back packets on the Exit-Node this hop within the path of tor is not outside, it is always fully encryted for the messaging packets and should be seen as one Tor-Path, especially if the Listener-Ping-Back function (the Echo capabilities) is build in the Exit-Node-Tor Software. > > Spot-On is already a Tor-Messenger - as it uses also HTTPs and it sends only encrypted packets. > > A test is easy to make: > > `(1) Start the Tor-Browser, which has always the Port 9051 to Tor, Tor is running.` > > `Next to Surfing with Tor-Browser Firefox the Chat with Tor-Messenger Spot-On can start.` > > `(2) Start Spot-On on a webserver and create in the Listeners Tab a Listener on Port 4710.` > > `(3) Start two Spot-On Instances Alice and Bob on two Laptops, in the Neighbors Tab you connect the Webserver via Tor: Add the IP and Port 4710 to the neighbor and choose Proxy:` 127.0.0.1 `Port 4710.` > > You get the the Path: > > `Tor-Chat-Client-Alice - Tor - Internet - Echo-Server - Internet - Tor - Tor-Chat-Client-Bob` > > The idea is now to integrate this a bit more: > > `Tor-Chat-Client-Spot-On-Alice - Tor - [Tor-Exit-Node also Reflec-Tor (Echo-Server)] - Tor - Tor-Chat-Client-Spot-On-Bob` > > You see, the way stays all within the Tor-Family. > > For sure, in case Alice does not want to use Tor, she also can message to Bob, who is behind Tor. > > `Tor-Chat-Client-Spot-On-Alice --> [Tor-Exit-Node as Entry-Node also Reflec-Tor (Echo-Server)] - Tor - Tor-Chat-Client-Spot-On-Bob` > > The IP of an Entry-Node is shown in the Tor-Browser and can get a port added. Then two user can simply cata over that node. > > We need in times of surveillance, data retention, chat control and for sake of the needs of whistleblowser and people who want to chat privat and anonymously more decentral and open source chat server. > > The mission is: Every Tor-Exit Node is an Entry-Node for Chat. > > It should be not a lot of code to be added to the ports of an Exit-Node and displaying the Port of the Exit-Node in the Tor-Browser path icon. > > This makes sense in several effects to be discussed and developed further: > > - Taking the next Development Step for Tor-Messaging: BTW, A Forum about Tor-Messaging could be made as a category here in the forum please. > > - directly support Tor-based Messaging for the Spot-On Messaging client > > > To be developed and discussed is, if this infra-structure could help to > > - support bootstrapping of Tor > > - support Censorship circumvention of Tor Reflec-Tors as SnowFlakes over the Messenger with EPKS > > - Accept, that some routing to an HTTPS internet server at the Tor-Node is faster than to an hidden onion server at the Tor Node. > > > Well, to add some "ping-in-and-out" for an packet is what every netcat and socat under linux can do. It is a small development step to make each Tor-Exit node a free chat server for messaging, which is a big step for mankind to have a network of free messaging chat servers. > > Lets also see, how users and community will test and develop this messaging. So it is not only a discussion for developers, it is also a step forward the needs of the communities for a free internet: > > - for chat and their discussions. > > > A few code lines to exit nodes make them a Reflec-Tor and messaging over Tor can start really decentral and open source and free. > > What do you think? does this privacy-concept bring more privacy and reliability in packet delivery to messaging with Tor? > > Regards

2 2