- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Tor Fails to Start on Ubuntu 16.04
by heartsucker 13 Nov '16

13 Nov '16

Hey everyone I have a fresh install of Ubuntu 16.04 that is unable to start Tor. Some useful output: root@tor-1 ~ # uname -a Linux tor-1 4.4.0-47-generic #68-Ubuntu SMP Wed Oct 26 19:39:52 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux root@tor-1 ~ # apt-cache policy tor tor: Installed: 0.2.8.9-1~xenial+1 Candidate: 0.2.8.9-1~xenial+1 Version table: *** 0.2.8.9-1~xenial+1 500 500 http://deb.torproject.org/torproject.org xenial/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status root@tor-1 ~ # journalctl -u tor ... Nov 13 00:52:39 tor-1 systemd[1]: Starting Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (multi-instance-master)... Nov 13 00:52:39 tor-1 systemd[1]: Started Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (multi-instance-master). <and then nothing else as it hangs> Tor fails to get beyond this message for any config I have tried (including the default). I tried replacing the systemd unit file with one of my own and was able to start Tor, however it would crash every 5 minutes (though the logs. The commands used in the systemd file and the command init.d script are both able to start Tor correctly if I run them in a TTY as I can see from a second terminal. Is anyone else running Tor on Xenial, and if so, have they run into this problem? -h

4 4

Automatic IPv6 address detection in Tor
by diffusae 11 Nov '16

11 Nov '16

Hi! Is this already solved in 0.2.8.9-1 for addresses with global scope? https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/17153 I was trying to configure a global reachable IPv6 address, but getting the following error: "unable to use configured ipv6 address "[::]" in a descriptor." The only way ist to set a clear global address in the config. The ISP is changing the 64 bit prefix a bit from time to time and I don't want to configure it manually every two weeks or so. Best regards,

2 7

Research - Tor and the shaping of resistance technologies
by COLLIER Ben 09 Nov '16

09 Nov '16

Hello all, Greetings from (currently freezing cold) Scotland and apologies for the cross-posting. I'm a researcher at the University of Edinburgh studying antisurveillance technologies, software development and how these are shaped at different levels by ideas about crime and surveillance. I'd describe my work as criminological but with a strong critical dimension - my research isn't about "fighting crime" or developing cybersecurity policy. I'm interested instead in exploring the power relationships, social and technological factors which determine how actions and communities are labelled criminal, and include harms caused by states and other powerful actors which may not traditionally be considered as "crimes". >From this perspective, I would like to explore how the values and perspectives of people who develop software to resist surveillance and promote anonymity online shape the technologies they work on, and whether this expertise changes how they see these issues. I have a background in (statistical) programming and I'm particularly interested in finding out how people see these issues playing out in practice in their work. While I'd like to carry out more in-depth research in the new year, at this stage I'm interested in making sure I'm asking the right questions. As such, I'd be very grateful if anyone involved in Tor development, either as a core developer or as a volunteer, would be interested in having a chat, or if possible a short interview. Any discussions would be anonymous and carried out in accordance with the ethics policy of the University of Edinburgh, and you would be able to withdraw consent for participation at any time for any reason - or none at all. I'll be contactable at this email address (listed in my signature) and on the IRC channels as JHistone - if you're interested (or just want to say hi or have a chat) please feel free to get in touch. Best wishes, Ben Collier Doctoral Researcher The University of Edinburgh SCCJR profile: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/about-us/people/ben-collier/ Edinburgh University profile: http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/research/students/viewstudent?ref=339 Twitter: @JohnnyHistone Email: s1263350(a)sms.ed.ac.uk The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

1 0

Tor relay balks with "router_pick_published_address(): Success: chose address x.x.x.x"
by Tobias Sachs 08 Nov '16

08 Nov '16

Hey, my Tor relay https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/B567E8E39641F61091C1F2CAAAF73D3D1BF9C… balks with the following message which is repeated in the log with the "info" logging level up to 23251 times at the exact same millisecond. The relay responds at :9030/tor/server/authority with a 503 error. router_pick_published_address(): Success: chose address 'x.x.x.x' This is a counting from the log with the corresponding timestamp. Nov 01 18:37:13.000 - 23251 Nov 01 18:37:22.000 - 59 Nov 01 18:38:17.000 - 23195 Nov 01 18:38:22.000 - 57 Nov 01 19:19:22.000 - 50 Nov 01 19:19:23.000 - 312 Nov 01 19:19:24.000 - 333 Nov 01 19:19:25.000 - 74 Nov 01 19:20:22.000 - 52 Nov 01 19:38:17.000 - 23207 Nov 01 20:38:17.000 - 23232 140 times exactly 49 repeats in around 2 hours. Interesting is that there is no error about this 503 error in the log only my monitoring is aware of the issue. I hope you coul'd help me out with this issue. Best Regards Tobias

3 3

Drop in consensus weight
by r1610091651 08 Nov '16

08 Nov '16

Hi all The consensus weight of the relay I'm running drop recently (5th of nov) to almost half of previous value. To my knowledge there was no changes on my end. https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/36EE8D47E570B8D5515460A9972F3CFD9EDFD… Is there a way to identify the cause of this drop? Is there anyone else in same situation? Thanks Seb

3 8

Interrogated by Finnish police for alleged idendity crimes, fraud and attempts of fraud
by Juuso Lapinlampi 08 Nov '16

08 Nov '16

Putting the word out: I was interrogated by the Finnish police today for multiple alleged counts (15+) of identity crimes, fraud and attempts of fraud. The invitation letter to be interrogated was sent out on 2016-10-21 and received by me on 2016-10-25. Today is 2016-10-31. The police suspects me because of an "IP-address assigned to my name", which I can't confirm or deny to have a relation to me. As a suspect, I was not told what this aclaimed IP-address was on a specific date to my knowledge. It is only speculation if these allegations wrongly against me have something to do with my relation with the Tor community or activism about digital rights online. Pending ongoing investigation, I am not allowed by law to share more specific details about to the investigation. I'd be glad to reveal more details about the case once the investigation is over and share/hear how I became a suspect, once I know about it. (Note that my story is at least slightly opinionated.) I had a witness with me and I feel like my rights were being violated during the interrogation. The officer (not to be named publicly in respect for privacy) didn't want to allow me to write down their badge number by taking the badge away from me while trying to write down the numbers. The officer looked slightly anxious. After refusing to comment on few questions (to which I have a legal right as a suspect), soon after me and my belongings with me were searched for aclaimed "security reasons" and "making sure I'm not recording this interrogation (with a phone)". I'll let you decide on the implications on unwarranted searches and individual legal protection. (See supreme court decision KKO:1990:36.) I audibly and multiple times in calm manner protested to not consent to searches, but alas it happened against my will without being suspected of wrongdoing at the police station in front of my witness. I didn't physically resist but also didn't voluntarily help the officer. The officer asked me inappropriate questions which were not related to the investigation. I was asked about my previous involvement with the police, how much I knew about the law and unsolicited advice about how "it will be easier for me if I talked". I demanded the officer to write down every question since the beginning of interrogation to the interrogation minutes, including the inappropriate ones, but the officer refused, trying to make up a fake reason how they were "irrelevant". The officer raised their voice once or twice during the 45 minutes of interrogation, apparently angry that I would not "make a confession" or "help out and tell more" to prove innocence. Confronting the officer again with a simple question "am I a suspect or a witness" to confirm my position, I was confirmed again that I was a suspect in the case. Subtly reminding that "I have my rights" that should be respected, the officer replied among the lines of "I have my rights too" with disrespect. After the interrogation minutes did not rightfully represent what was actually questioned, the only sensible thing to me was to not sign the minutes. The officer after the officer made threatening claims about how I "would be going to court" over this, but didn't spend too much effort on trying to get my signature. Once the interrogation was concluded, the officer made an unsolicited comment of "gladly not seeing people like [me] often". I told that I would be in contact with my lawyers. I am glad that I was not detained in a cell or arrested, which in my opinion I can likely attribute to having a witness with me. Looking back at what just happened at the police station, I should have demanded a lawyer immediately to the interrogation after having my rights violated, but I'm relying on my witness for now to make a testimony if necessary. I repeat that I absolutely deny being guilty of any suspected crimes. Be safe out there, tor-relays@ and all. (I have legal support behind me and have never been particularly worried about the investigation or outcome of this case.) Proof of invitation letter: https://wubthecaptain.eu/files/legal/2016-10-21-alleged-fraud-identity-crim…

8 11

33C3 Ticket
by pa011 07 Nov '16

07 Nov '16

First poor round of selling is over - anybody holding more tickets than he needs already? Would still take one :-) Paul

1 0

proper way to insert PGP key in torrc?
by anemoi＠tutanota.de 04 Nov '16

04 Nov '16

When I insert my PGP key just like a block of text below the contactinfo line my Tor relay stops working. What is the correct way to insert the PGP key into the torrc file?

11 13

Guard before Stable flag?
by John Ricketts 03 Nov '16

03 Nov '16

Hello Everyone, When looking at my list on Atlas (21 entries) I'm seeing that some of my relays are getting the Guard flag before they become stable. https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/quintex I'm going to make the assumption this is normal behavior but I still find it odd. I also find it odd that I haven't received the stable flag all of the relays given their uptime. Thoughts, anyone? Thank you! John L. Ricketts, PhD Quintex Alliance Consulting john(a)quintex.com<mailto:john@quintex.com> @aquintex on Twitter

3 4

Tor bandwith question
by anemoi＠tutanota.de 03 Nov '16

03 Nov '16

In order to clarify this once and for all: If I setup a Tor relay with 200 kBps, do I slow down the Tor network? What amount of bandwith is needed in order to not slow down the network?

7 7

most (>57% cwfr) of the tor network still vulnerable to CVE-2016-8860 - update your relay!
by nusenu 02 Nov '16

02 Nov '16

just a reminder since most of the tor network (including some of the biggest operators) still runs vulnerable relays https://blog.torproject.org/blog/tor-0289-released-important-fixes Since 2/3 directory authorities removed most vulnerable versions from their 'recommended versions' you should see a log entry if you run outdated versions (except if you run 0.2.5.12). It is not possible to reliable determine the exact CW fraction affected[1] due to the fact that patches were released that didn't increase tor's version number. Therefore it is also possible that you get log entries even if you run a patched version (IMHO this hasn't been handled in the most professional way). Update instructions Debian/Ubuntu ============== make sure you use the Torproject repository: https://www.torproject.org/docs/debian.html.en (you can also use the debian repository but the Torproject's repo will provide you with the latest releases) aptitude update && aptitude install tor CentOS/RHEL/Fedora =================== yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing tor FreeBSD ============ pkg update pkg upgrade OpenBSD =========== pkg_add -u tor Windows ======== No updated binaries available for this platform yet. [1] as of 2016-10-25 18:00 (onionoo data) conservative estimate ---------------------- (counts only 0.2.8.9 and 0.2.9.4-alpha as patched) 31% CW fraction patched optimistic estimate ------------------- (additionally assumes every non-Windows running 0.2.4.27, 0.2.5.12, 0.2.6.10, 0.2.7.6 that restarted since 2016-10-17 is patched): 43% CW fraction patched

9 16

assign_to_cpuworker failed. Ignoring.
by Felix 01 Nov '16

01 Nov '16

Hi everybody May be someone can help with this warning: The security update (Tor v0.2.8.9 running on FreeBSD with Libevent 2.0.22-stable, OpenSSL LibreSSL 2.4.3 and Zlib 1.2.8.) shows the following log entry each hour: Oct 19 02:51:07.000 [warn] Your system clock just jumped 136 seconds forward; assuming established circuits no longer work. Oct 19 02:51:07.000 [warn] assign_to_cpuworker failed. Ignoring. ... Oct 19 02:51:07.000 [warn] assign_to_cpuworker failed. Ignoring. Oct 19 02:51:15.000 [notice] Tor has successfully opened a circuit. Looks like client functionality is working. ... Oct 19 03:51:10.000 [warn] Your system clock just jumped 138 seconds forward; assuming established circuits no longer work. Oct 19 03:51:11.000 [warn] assign_to_cpuworker failed. Ignoring. ... Oct 19 04:50:37.000 [warn] Your system clock just jumped 105 seconds forward; assuming established circuits no longer work. Oct 19 04:50:37.000 [warn] assign_to_cpuworker failed. Ignoring. ... Oct 19 05:51:14.000 [warn] Your system clock just jumped 142 seconds forward; assuming established circuits no longer work. Oct 19 05:51:15.000 [warn] assign_to_cpuworker failed. Ignoring. ... The warning first appeared on 2.8.7 after update on September 13th (Tor v0.2.8.7 running on FreeBSD with Libevent 2.0.22-stable, OpenSSL LibreSSL 2.4.2 and Zlib 1.2.8.). That time I switched back (Tor v0.2.7.6 running on FreeBSD with Libevent 2.0.22-stable, OpenSSL LibreSSL 2.4.2 and Zlib 1.2.8.) and the warning disappeared. What can I do? The warning is reproted in tor-talk: https:// lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2016-October/042425.html -- Best regards, Felix

3 7

Blocking Domains
by Tristan 01 Nov '16

01 Nov '16

Is it possible to block domain names in Tor's ExitPolicy? I've been getting abuses on *.panelboxmanager.com, and I'd like to be proactive about this if possible.

8 13

Stats not updated for several days?
by Pascal Terjan 01 Nov '16

01 Nov '16

For example https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/20462CBA5DA4C2D963567D17D0B7249718114… says uptime is 12 days and current version is 0.2.6.10 but I upgraded the machine and updated tor to 0.2.8.9 over a day ago: # uptime 09:30:50 up 1 day, 8:32, 1 user, load average: 0.68, 0.81, 0.88 # ps aux | grep t[o]r debian-+ 3389 60.4 15.3 510300 314260 ? Ssl Oct31 1177:17 /usr/bin/tor --defaults-torrc /usr/share/tor/tor-service-defaults-torrc -f /etc/tor/torrc --RunAsDaemon 0 # dpkg -l tor Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Architecture Description +++-=========================================-=========================-=========================-======================================================================================== ii tor 0.2.8.9-1~xenial+1 amd64 anonymizing overlay network for TCP My new relay also is not known yet, and does not appear in "Family Members" while it was added yesterday.

5 7

OpenWrt
by Nima Fatemi 31 Oct '16

31 Oct '16

Hi relay operators, I'm curious to see if there are any openwrt users here and if by any chance any of you is running a relay or a bridge on it. Here's why: The current Tor package on openwrt is left without an active maintainer. I just send a patch to update it to 0.2.8.9 and I'm wondering whether it's worth to put the time and maintain the package. Best, -- Nima 0X58C4B928A3E218F6 | @mrphs "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" --Evelyn Beatrice Hall

2 1

ExitPolicy reject 184.107.0.0/16* funio.com
by Markus Koch 28 Oct '16

28 Oct '16

Getting abuse mass mails on nearly all exist in the last hours: The following intrusion attempts were detected: ./pilipia/pilipiak.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:18:06:35 -0400] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 5734 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0.1" ./pilipia/pilipiak.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:18:06:36 -0400] "GET /?subscribe-email=dlcw87%40hotmail.com&subscribe-submit=Informez-moi& HTTP/1.1" 200 5734 "http://pilipiak.com/" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0.1" ./autoparcs.promoafrik.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:00:30:30 -0400] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 26737 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0.1" ./autoparcs.promoafrik.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:00:30:31 -0400] "GET /search-listing.php?list_search_box=&subscribe=Search& HTTP/1.1" 200 9280 "http://autoparcs.com/" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0.1" ./pilipiak.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:18:06:35 -0400] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 5734 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0.1" ./pilipiak.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:18:06:36 -0400] "GET /?subscribe-email=dlcw87%40hotmail.com&subscribe-submit=Informez-moi& HTTP/1.1" 200 5734 "http://pilipiak.com/" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0.1" ./promoaf/autoparcs.promoafrik.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:00:30:30 -0400] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 26737 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0.1" ./promoaf/autoparcs.promoafrik.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:00:30:31 -0400] "GET /search-listing.php?list_search_box=&subscribe=Search& HTTP/1.1" 200 9280 "http://autoparcs.com/" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0.1" ./hansenq/hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [26/Oct/2016:23:41:12 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&view=register&Itemid=2 HTTP/1.1" 200 17902 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.0" ./hansenq/hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [26/Oct/2016:23:41:16 -0400] "POST /index.php?option=com_user&view=register&Itemid=2 HTTP/1.1" 200 116 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.104 Safari/537.36" ./hansenq/hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:00:02:49 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&view=register&Itemid=2 HTTP/1.1" 200 17902 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.0" ./hansenq/hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:00:02:51 -0400] "POST /index.php?option=com_user&view=register&Itemid=2 HTTP/1.1" 200 116 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.104 Safari/537.36" ./hansenq/hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:10:32:33 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&task=activate&activation=e36afd6ab6a066e3485fcd4aedbc74ac HTTP/1.1" 200 11230 "-" "" ./hansenq/hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:10:32:34 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&view=login HTTP/1.1" 200 12349 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.104 Safari/537.36" ./hansenq/hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:10:32:36 -0400] "POST /index.php?option=com_user&view=login HTTP/1.1" 200 116 "http://hq-hospitality.com/index.php?option=com_user&view=login" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.104 Safari/537.36" ./hansenq/hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:10:32:38 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&view=user&task=edit HTTP/1.1" 200 25720 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.104 Safari/537.36" ./hansenq/hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:12:55:40 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&task=activate&activation=72ca806c4be186be71e7a5e0316e8681 HTTP/1.1" 200 11230 "-" "" ./hansenq/hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:19:28:56 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&view=register&Itemid=2 HTTP/1.1" 200 17902 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.0" ./hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [26/Oct/2016:23:41:12 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&view=register&Itemid=2 HTTP/1.1" 200 17902 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.0" ./hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [26/Oct/2016:23:41:16 -0400] "POST /index.php?option=com_user&view=register&Itemid=2 HTTP/1.1" 200 116 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.104 Safari/537.36" ./hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:00:02:49 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&view=register&Itemid=2 HTTP/1.1" 200 17902 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.0" ./hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:00:02:51 -0400] "POST /index.php?option=com_user&view=register&Itemid=2 HTTP/1.1" 200 116 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.104 Safari/537.36" ./hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:10:32:33 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&task=activate&activation=e36afd6ab6a066e3485fcd4aedbc74ac HTTP/1.1" 200 11230 "-" "" ./hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:10:32:34 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&view=login HTTP/1.1" 200 12349 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.104 Safari/537.36" ./hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:10:32:36 -0400] "POST /index.php?option=com_user&view=login HTTP/1.1" 200 116 "http://hq-hospitality.com/index.php?option=com_user&view=login" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.104 Safari/537.36" ./hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:10:32:38 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&view=user&task=edit HTTP/1.1" 200 25720 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.104 Safari/537.36" ./hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:12:55:40 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&task=activate&activation=72ca806c4be186be71e7a5e0316e8681 HTTP/1.1" 200 11230 "-" "" ./hqhospitality.hansen-quao.com:188.166.63.113 - - [27/Oct/2016:19:28:56 -0400] "GET /index.php?option=com_user&view=register&Itemid=2 HTTP/1.1" 200 17902 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.0" Abuse Department Funio to stop the mass flood of abuse bot mails I tried to reject the IP space of funio but Tor is telling me its not allowed. Why? Markus

5 6

Abuses: Suspicious botnet ramnit attack
by pa011 28 Oct '16

28 Oct '16

Hi, got the abuse below on three different exits. Anybody having any idea what to do and how to possibly to stop this in the future? Thanks Paul CERT-EU has received information regarding an infected IP belonging to your network, which may have security problems. The information regarding the problems is also included as attachments in both CSV and XML formats. All timestamps are in UTC. At this time we do not have any more information. Where: - ASN: is the Autonomous System Number; - IP: the Internet Protocol address associated with this activity; - TIME: discovery time of the malicious activity; - PTR/DNAME: PTR/DNAME record - CC: ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 two-letter country code; - TYPE: type of the security problem or threat; - INFO: provides any additional information, if available.asn|ip|time|ptr|cc|type|info|info2 ASxxxxx|xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx|25-10-2016 12:10:09Z|XX|botnet drone|Description: Ramnit botnet victim connection to sinkhole details, Timestamp : 1477397409.72, City : none, Count: 8, First Seen: 25-10-2016 12:10:09, Last Seen: 25-10-2016

3 2

Re: [tor-relays] Digital Ocean - running Exit node locked
by Tristan 28 Oct '16

28 Oct '16

Guess I'm next. My relay has been running for 3 months now. I'm doing my best to be a good neighbor though. After the first month, I got an SSH abuse, so now I reject SSH traffic. A month later I got an SQL hack attempt, and I switched to the reduced-reduced exit policy. Haven't gotten anything else yet. On Oct 7, 2016 4:34 PM, "Markus Koch" <niftybunny(a)googlemail.com> wrote: They will kick you after 2-3 months. Delete account, make new account. They will kick you after 2-3 months. Delete account, make new account. They will kick you after 2-3 months. Delete account, make new account. They will kick you after 2-3 months. Delete account, make new account. Welcome to DigitalOcean! Markus 2016-10-07 23:23 GMT+02:00 pa011 <pa011(a)web.de>: > Seems like even DO is not very much in favour of running Exits any more ? > > Anybody made the same experience - how to handle this please ? > > Thanks and Regards > Paul > > > "Hello -Although we do not specifically disallow TOR exit nodes, as the account holder you are responsible for all the traffic going through your droplet (including traffic that an exit node may generate). > > Also be aware that we do not allow some of the traffic types that come out of a typical TOR exit node (torrents, spam, SSH probes, hacking attempts, botnets, DDoS, etc). > > If you are unable to stop this sort of traffic, please reconsider running a TOR exit node as it may lead to your account suspension or termination. > > Please refer to our Terms of Service for greater detail on this issue: https://www.digitalocean.com/legal/terms/ > > Best, > > DigitalOcean Support " > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

6 12

Rampup speed of Exit relay
by D.S. Ljungmark 27 Oct '16

27 Oct '16

Hi all, I'm looking at some traffic patterns for my Exit relay, and I'm frankly a bit disappointed with the utilization. Currently it's running at a load average of 0.3-0.5, and CPU idle at 70-80%. We're not limited on Bandwidth (tests show that our max cap is more than safe to produce), yet, we're barely reaching 20% of our potential allocated traffic. We've reached "fast" and "guard", and got the "stable" flag as well, so in theory we ought to see traffic move a bit higher than currently. So, how do we get tor to move past 100-200Mbit? Is it just a waiting game? //D.S. -- 8362 CB14 98AD 11EF CEB6 FA81 FCC3 7674 449E 3CFC

10 21

Really bad ISP
by Lluís 27 Oct '16

27 Oct '16

Hello, I am a relay operator in Spain (or at least I try to). I am just desperate with my ISP, he is just leaving the VDSL2 connection down several times a day, taking the relay with it. Does anyone know a much more stable, tor-friendly, ISP for an Spanish user ? The following record of assigned IPs in a **single** day shows the dimension of the drama: 95.23.157.152 - Tue Oct 25 01:00:02 CEST 2016 95.23.156.52 - Tue Oct 25 07:00:02 CEST 2016 95.23.157.180 - Tue Oct 25 11:54:06 CEST 2016 188.79.227.152 - Tue Oct 25 12:20:52 CEST 2016 95.23.155.112 - Tue Oct 25 13:12:30 CEST 2016 95.23.144.75 - Tue Oct 25 13:15:19 CEST 2016 188.77.208.15 - Tue Oct 25 13:29:02 CEST 2016 95.23.159.249 - Tue Oct 25 14:00:06 CEST 2016 95.23.146.89 - Tue Oct 25 14:12:12 CEST 2016 95.23.159.163 - Tue Oct 25 14:19:21 CEST 2016 188.79.238.188 - Tue Oct 25 14:34:55 CEST 2016 188.79.237.90 - Tue Oct 25 14:36:05 CEST 2016 188.79.229.164 - Tue Oct 25 14:57:30 CEST 2016 95.23.149.124 - Tue Oct 25 15:08:51 CEST 2016 188.79.237.0 - Tue Oct 25 15:10:12 CEST 2016 188.77.213.199 - Tue Oct 25 16:28:47 CEST 2016 95.23.153.98 - Tue Oct 25 16:32:50 CEST 2016 95.23.146.46 - Tue Oct 25 16:49:03 CEST 2016 188.79.235.239 - Tue Oct 25 17:10:03 CEST 2016 188.77.215.232 - Tue Oct 25 17:20:03 CEST 2016 95.23.146.36 - Tue Oct 25 17:30:03 CEST 2016 95.23.148.238 - Tue Oct 25 18:10:03 CEST 2016 95.23.149.136 - Tue Oct 25 18:20:03 CEST 2016 188.77.211.53 - Tue Oct 25 18:50:03 CEST 2016 188.77.211.90 - Tue Oct 25 19:30:03 CEST 2016 188.79.225.153 - Tue Oct 25 20:10:01 CEST 2016 95.23.157.171 - Tue Oct 25 21:00:02 CEST 2016 188.77.212.227 - Tue Oct 25 22:00:02 CEST 2016 95.23.157.179 - Tue Oct 25 22:30:02 CEST 2016 Thanks for your assintance, Lluís

3 5

Re: [tor-relays] most (>57% cwfr) of the tor network still vulnerable to CVE-2016-8860 - update your relay!
by Alan 27 Oct '16

27 Oct '16

0.2.5.12 is the latest version from the repo. Im assuming I should pull down the source and compile it. >> Thanks for the update, my main relay was vulnerable but i've patched it now to 0.2.8.9. >> >> My Raspberry Pi is running 0.2.5.12 -- is that ok? > > If your version is from before 2016-10-17, your relay is vulnerable. > > To be sure you should be running 0.2.8.9. > > > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >

4 5

cryptsetup some folders
by Petrusko 26 Oct '16

26 Oct '16

Hey all, I'm planning to customise a RPi with Raspbian already running, and using cryptsetup (LUKS) to have a partition more secure for some reasons... So the goal is to move some existing sensitive folders to this new encrypted partition. Some sym-links will be used for those directories. About Tor, if I'm not wrong, those directories can be moved to this encrypted partition : /var/lib/tor : so I'm planning to move /var... So at final, planning to move : /home /var /tmp (why not swap file ?) Any suggestions and master's thoughts are welcome :) -- Petrusko EBE23AE5

7 17

Re: [tor-relays] most (>57% cwfr) of the tor network still vulnerable to CVE-2016-8860 - update your relay!
by Alan 26 Oct '16

26 Oct '16

Thanks for the update, my main relay was vulnerable but i've patched it now to 0.2.8.9. My Raspberry Pi is running 0.2.5.12 -- is that ok? > just a reminder since most of the tor network (including some of the biggest operators) still runs vulnerable relays > > https://blog.torproject.org/blog/tor-0289-released-important-fixes > > > Since 2/3 directory authorities removed most vulnerable versions from their 'recommended versions' you should see a log entry if you run outdated versions (except if you run 0.2.5.12). > > > It is not possible to reliable determine the exact CW fraction > affected[1] due to the fact that patches were released that didn't increase tor's version number. > Therefore it is also possible that you get log entries even if you run a patched version (IMHO this hasn't been handled in the most professional way). > > > Update instructions > > Debian/Ubuntu > ============== > > make sure you use the Torproject repository: > https://www.torproject.org/docs/debian.html.en > > (you can also use the debian repository but the Torproject's repo will provide you with the latest releases) > > > aptitude update && aptitude install tor > > > CentOS/RHEL/Fedora > =================== > > yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing tor > > > FreeBSD > ============ > > pkg update > pkg upgrade > > OpenBSD > =========== > > pkg_add -u tor > > > Windows > ======== > > No updated binaries available for this platform yet. > > > > > [1] as of 2016-10-25 18:00 (onionoo data) > conservative estimate > ---------------------- > (counts only 0.2.8.9 and 0.2.9.4-alpha as patched) > 31% CW fraction patched > > optimistic estimate > ------------------- > (additionally assumes every non-Windows running 0.2.4.27, 0.2.5.12, 0.2.6.10, 0.2.7.6 that restarted since 2016-10-17 is patched): > 43% CW fraction patched > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >

2 1

33C3 Voucher
by pa011 26 Oct '16

26 Oct '16

Anybody holding a Voucher for 33C3 in Hamburg at the End of December? More than happy to get hold of it :-) Paul

2 1

Research project - comparing abuse complaints on Tor exits to those of regular ISPs
by dguthrie＠posteo.net 24 Oct '16

24 Oct '16

Hi folks, I am looking to research what proportion of Tor traffic across a Tor exit is "legitimate"/regular internet traffic, by comparing abuse complaints on Tor exits to those of regular ISPs. I think this is an interesting project because it is illegal to analyse traffic on the exit node without amounting to a wiretap, so this is a good way to get some idea about what traffic is comparable to regular internet traffic. I am aware that some people on this list run small ISPs. I am asking a favour that you might be able to send me a sample of abuse complaints over several months, or at least and some idea of how many complaints you recieved. I would need to know what type of complaint they were (torrenting vs more serious complaints), and the volume of traffic that passed through your network. My public key is posted below. Thank you, Duncan Guthrie 4096R/16BD5A5D 425A BEE8 24BB 7665 7FDC F7B6 8767 0301 16BD 5A5D

6 6