- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Re: [tor-relays] IP address change
by balbea16 24 Oct '16

24 Oct '16

Hi TimTNX for your fast response. I'm afaid, that I have to stay with my current ISP. However, from time to time he keeps my IP address unchanged for up to 4 days. Mike -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- Von: teor <teor2345(a)gmail.com> Datum: 24.10.16 14:34 (GMT+01:00) An: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Betreff: Re: [tor-relays] IP address change > On 24 Oct. 2016, at 23:12, balbea16 <balbea16(a)gmx.de> wrote: > > Hi There > My ISP changes my IP address about every 24 hours. It takes 10 minutes until my tor server recognises this, and an hour until all usual connections are reestablished. How can I speed this up? The tor directory authorities vote on relays every hour. There is no way to speed this up. > Does it help to use a DNS? No, Tor uses your IP address. > To pay for a static address is not an option. > Any ideas? Thank you. Mike I'm sorry, this is just how Tor is designed. But you are still contributing to the network. You could try renting a cheap server in a data centre. Most of them offer static IP addresses. Tim T -- Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n xmpp: teor at torproject dot org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

1 0

IP address change
by balbea16 24 Oct '16

24 Oct '16

Hi There My ISP changes my IP address about every 24 hours. It takes 10 minutes until my tor server recognises this, and an hour until all usual connections are reestablished. How can I speed this up? Does it help to use a DNS? To pay for a static address is not an option. Any ideas? Thank you. Mike

2 1

numtcpsock prevents relay from working properly.
by Nils Erik Flick 24 Oct '16

24 Oct '16

Hi, I am experiencing trouble with a new VPS relay. https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/41F07731207742860D43AC426FBAE2F3947BD… It spontaneously acquired an advertised bandwidth of 2.67MB/s but then started to sputter. Failing because we have 1314 connections already ... Specifically, looking at /proc/user_beancounters numtcpsock is the culprit, which is limited to 1360 (some other processes are using the remaining sockets). This artificial limit causes new connections to fail even though send/receive buffers or CPU usage are well below critical. The value can't be changed from inside the OpenVZ container. That's a pity because traffic appears to be unmetered and a lot of potential is wasted this way. I understand that there is currently no way to limit this inside the Tor process because every relay needs to be ready to connect to every other relay at any time. So I tried to get its consensus weight down. Gradually lowering the MaxAdvertisedBandwidth to 300k caused it to briefly acquire the "Stable" flag and run into trouble again. That's no better than a home connection. Worse, in fact, because the problem persists. I'm curious, is this a common experience? Asking customer service would mean explicitly drawing attention to the fact that I'm trying to use the cheap plan to run Tor nodes. That's completely against my instincts. On the other hand they *did* offer a free-form box in the registration form. Has anyone tried and if so, to any avail? Is there a workaround I'm missing? iptables can be configured freely, but I don't see how that would help. At this point I'll probably call it a day, try elsewhere and set this one up as a bridge instead. Frankly I was a bit surprised that technical snags like this aren't generally mentioned in relay setup guides or FAQs. For all I know, it may be common knowledge among expert sysadmins that OpenVZ should be shunned or whatever, but to someone with little prior experience as a user of commercial hosting, some of these limitations come as a surprise. In a bout of post factum searching, I only found this discussion https://serverfault.com/questions/698845/debian-limit-number-of-tcp-sockets… IMHO this kind of knowledge should be spread more "pro-actively", which is why I'm posting this on a public list. Peace, Erik

2 3

Linux kernel vulnerability
by I 24 Oct '16

24 Oct '16

Dirty COW (CVE-2016-5195) is a privilege escalation vulnerability in the Linux Kernel http://dirtycow.ninja/

9 14

CentOS 7 Packages
by Alice . 23 Oct '16

23 Oct '16

Hi, I have one relay on CentOS 6 and one on CentOS 7. The one running CentOS 7 hasn't had the 0.2.8.8 update yet and so is still running 0.2.8.7. The one running CentOS 6 has had the latest update. Is there a problem with getting CentOS 7 packages out? How much of a problem is this? Both now and in the future? Thanks Alice

2 1

Recommendation for DUMB COMPUTING devices for Tor Relays
by Dan Michaels 21 Oct '16

21 Oct '16

The Tor Project website recommends various security setups for people running Tor relays. Such as, don't run a web browser on the same machine as your Tor relay, otherwise the browser could get hacked, and then if Tor relays are hacked, it compromises the entire concept of Tor. In the age of FBI mass hacking, the FBI will attempt to hack all Tor relays, and thus, they can trace traffic throughout the entire proxy chain. According to NSA documents, all it takes is "one page load" to infect a browser, because they re-direct you to a fake website that hosts browser exploits, known as QUANTUM INSERT. The FBI will use this to take over all Tor relays that are running web browsers. So, I have a suggestion that I would like Tor Project to recommend. Tor Project needs to tell people.. use DUMB COMPUTING devices for running Tor relays. If your computer gets hacked, it can be deeply exploited in the firmware, such as BIOS, GPU, WiFi chip, etc. There are devices on the market, such as Raspberry Pi, or similar, which have NO WRITABLE FIRMWARE. This is known as being "stateless". It does not "hold state" across reboots. All firmware/drivers are stored on the SD card on the Raspberry Pi, and only loaded in on boot time. No component on the entire Pi holds state. NONE. There will likely be other similar devices. Therefore, it is truly possible to wipe a dumb computing device completely clean. If you try to wipe a regular laptop or desktop, you may have all this deeply infected firmware, such as BIOS, so you keep getting re-infected upon startup. Some people say, once deeply infected, it's near-impossible to clean it out, and you should just throw away your entire laptop and start again. Everyone running a Tor relay should be told to use a DUMB COMPUTING DEVICE. Another advantage is that these devices are often very cheap. Raspberry Pi is very cheap to buy. Other devices may be even cheaper. The instructions should be as follows... (1) Wipe your device clean, i.e. wipe clean the SD card which holds the OS + all firmware/drivers. (2) Then, re-install the OS clean, install Tor, and set up the relay. (3) Tor should be installed from the command line or from a previously-downloaded version on USB stick. Do not install Tor using the web browser, otherwise you could get infected. (4) Do not run anything else on the machine, other than the Tor relay. Using other programs, especially the web browser, could compromise the entire machine. And that's it. Tor Project should send out a message telling all people running Tor relays to follow these instructions. Let me know what you think.

8 7

relay lost most of its consensus weight
by jensm1 19 Oct '16

19 Oct '16

Hi, I just realised that my relay 'itwasntme' lost most of its consensus weight yesterday morning. The relay is only three weeks old, but it was finally picking up some traffic, which now is gone again. What could be the cause for this? Is there a problem with my relay or configuration? Thanks for your help! https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/F46C312E279185364F46EA06C58F792528091…

4 11

assign_to_cpuworker failed. Ignoring.
by Felix 19 Oct '16

19 Oct '16

Thanks for picking up. > It would help us to know if it's just FreeBSD, or just LibreSSL. It's both LibreSSL on FreeBSD 10.1. Same setup worked fine since months through serveral versions of Tor (2.6.x and 2.7.x) and LibreSSL (2.2.x until today). > Maybe mention the bug number on tor-talk, so that poster can provide more details? Might be. -- Felix

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] You dont love me anymore :(
by Tristan 18 Oct '16

18 Oct '16

Like David said, they just had the wrong IP, and it happened to be yours. In a world where computers outnumber people, even a single incorrect digit can have unintended side effects. Glad you got it fixed so quickly! On Oct 18, 2016 1:36 PM, "Markus Koch" <niftybunny(a)googlemail.com> wrote: Just solved but thank you very much for helping me out. It was confusing without end because this server was up for 10 months and high traffic. Markus 2016-10-18 20:30 GMT+02:00 Tristan <supersluether(a)gmail.com>: > According to this page: > https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ReportingBadRelays > > Looks like you need to get in touch work bad-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > > What's strange is that the bad relay team should have contacted you before > making a decision. > > > On Oct 18, 2016 1:23 PM, "Markus Koch" <niftybunny(a)googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> Thank you very much. How do I dispute this? >> >> >> 2016-10-18 20:20 GMT+02:00 Tristan <supersluether(a)gmail.com>: >> > I don't know why or how, but you've got the BadExit flag from moria1: >> > https://consensus-health.torproject.org/consensus-health.html >> > >> > >> > On Oct 18, 2016 1:16 PM, "Markus Koch" <niftybunny(a)googlemail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> This is a guard/middle and should be good ... >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/B771AA877687F88E6F1CA5354756DF 6C8A7B6B24 >> >> >> >> and I have never ever seen this before. >> >> >> >> Markus >> >> >> >> >> >> 2016-10-18 20:13 GMT+02:00 Tristan <supersluether(a)gmail.com>: >> >> > I've seen 404s from time to time, but this is new. Did you get a bad >> >> > relay >> >> > flag somehow??? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Oct 18, 2016 1:12 PM, "Markus Koch" <niftybunny(a)googlemail.com> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> 20:08:18 [WARN] Received http status code 404 ("Not found") from >> >> >> server '86.59.21.38:80' while fetching >> >> >> "/tor/keys/fp-sk/14C131DFC5C6F93646BE72FA1401C02A- >> >> >> 8DF2E8B4-692049A2E7868BE9933107A39B1CE0C7CBF1BF65". >> >> >> 20:06:18 [WARN] Received http status code 404 ("Not found") from >> >> >> server '194.109.206.212:80' while fetching >> >> >> "/tor/keys/fp-sk/14C131DFC5C6F93646BE72FA1401- >> >> >> C02A8DF2E8B4-692049A2E7868BE9933107A39B1CE0C7CBF1BF65". >> >> >> 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in >> >> >> this range.") response from dirserver '171.25.193.9:443'. Please >> >> >> correct. >> >> >> 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in >> >> >> this range.") response from dirserver '154.35.175.225:80'. Please >> >> >> correct. >> >> >> 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in >> >> >> this range.") response from dirserver '131.188.40.189:80'. Please >> >> >> correct. >> >> >> 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in >> >> >> this range.") response from dirserver '86.59.21.38:80'. Please >> >> >> correct. >> >> >> >> >> >> This is my niftypika server. This is animal abuse! Seriously, WTF is >> >> >> going wrong? >> >> >> >> >> >> Markus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> 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 >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> 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 >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

2 1

You dont love me anymore :(
by Markus Koch 18 Oct '16

18 Oct '16

20:08:18 [WARN] Received http status code 404 ("Not found") from server '86.59.21.38:80' while fetching "/tor/keys/fp-sk/14C131DFC5C6F93646BE72FA1401C02A- 8DF2E8B4-692049A2E7868BE9933107A39B1CE0C7CBF1BF65". 20:06:18 [WARN] Received http status code 404 ("Not found") from server '194.109.206.212:80' while fetching "/tor/keys/fp-sk/14C131DFC5C6F93646BE72FA1401- C02A8DF2E8B4-692049A2E7868BE9933107A39B1CE0C7CBF1BF65". 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '171.25.193.9:443'. Please correct. 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '154.35.175.225:80'. Please correct. 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '131.188.40.189:80'. Please correct. 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '86.59.21.38:80'. Please correct. This is my niftypika server. This is animal abuse! Seriously, WTF is going wrong? Markus

4 9

Why do 40% of Tor exits uses 8.8.8.8 for DNS resolving ?
by Toralf Förster 18 Oct '16

18 Oct '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Reading [1] I do wonder about that. Why do Tor exit relay operators avoid installing a local resolver - or at least simple a cache as shown in [2] ? Adding different nameserver= lines to /etc/resolv.conf than 8.8.8.8 shouldn't be a big thing, or ? [1] https://nymity.ch/tor-dns/tor-dns.pdf [2] https://zwiebeltoralf.de/torserver.html - -- Toralf PGP: C4EACDDE 0076E94E, OTR: 420E74C8 30246EE7 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHYEAREIAB4FAlgDW9QXHHRvcmFsZi5mb2Vyc3RlckBnbXguZGUACgkQxOrN3gB2 6U7l0AD9GolbdbnFmmDVACsdosxGC+bkD7czticuu0jTSQ5ObhYA/3aq74/N23bp D0mOLzfUmmDpiI2KXOSLvG/n8vrAgYlV =y46I -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

11 25

Re: [tor-relays] Smallest, cheapest, lightest computer for tor relay
by Neel Chauhan 18 Oct '16

18 Oct '16

>Yes it does make a real big difference. Get the Pi 3, the 1st Pi is an order of magnitude slower. If you don't want to spend your money on a RPI 3, you can also look at a used RPI 2. If you are willing to have a computer that is a bit larger, you can also use a smaller desktop PC, like a Mac Mini, or a SFF Dell or HP. I have a Raspberry Pi 2, but use a homebuilt Pentium 4 desktop on a 60/25 cable connection (Optimum Online), and a Dell Optiplex 755 (Core 2 Duo) on a 50/50 FTTH connection (Verizon FiOS). I don't use the RPI because I want my Tor nodes to use FreeBSD instead of Linux, and am not sure if RPI has the best FreeBSD support (I'm even a FreeBSD contributor, but my laptop which I typed this from unfortunately runs Arch). The disadvantage of the PC approach is space and higher power consumption, but the advantage is that you can use *BSD and Windows, and can possibly take advantage of faster speeds. But if you are fine with Linux, and, the RPI 2/3 is a good choice. There are also other SBC computers like the BeagleBone. SBC computers are great if they have ADSL/Cable, but if they have fiber to the home (Verizon FiOS, Google Fiber, etc.), a used desktop (or a higher end SBC) may be better (in my opinion) as they usually have a faster upstream and a desktop may take better advantage of the speed. My atlas entries are below (for the two nodes from my two homes, not my exits): https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/AED76373324653A0522DF30550BA31902B2CF… https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/D5B8C38539C509380767D4DE20DE84CF84EE8… Thanks, Neel Chauhan === https://www.neelc.org/

7 8

Tor Relay Operators Meetup at hack.lu - 19.10. 16:00
by Tyler Durden 17 Oct '16

17 Oct '16

Hi We are present at this years hack.lu together with a booth with the Chaos Computer Club Luxembourg. Should you guys happen to be around just come by and talk to us. ( We do have Mate, Mate Schnapps and Flora Power :P ) Tor Relay Operators Meet-Up Where: FVDE & C3L booth at the main hall Date: 19th of October 2016 Time: 16h00 Greetings -- Sam Grüneisen - President Frënn vun der Ënn A.S.B.L. enn.lu

1 0

I think I my relay is broken
by Tamara West 17 Oct '16

17 Oct '16

SocksPort 0 RunAsDaemon 1 ORPort 443 Nickname saverig ContactInfo sinister(dot)hama(at)googlemail(dot)com [tor-relay.co] DirPort 80 ExitPolicy reject *:* DisableDebuggerAttachment 0 ControlPort 9051 CookieAuthentication 1 There is no IP listed unless I located the incorrect file. /etc/tor/torrc 207.172.253.216 is my public address I do have the port forwarded. The whole point was so that anyone who couldn't reach tor normally and had to use 443, 80 could do so with my setup. I've noticed some weirdness with RCN though. Some IPs block and allow access differently and as far as I can tell no one seems to know why. I already had an issue with my streaming box not seeing my server. Also I know I've had a site hosted on my computer before. Without really knowing why getting a new IP resolved the issue.

1 0

I think I my relay is broken
by Tamara West 17 Oct '16

17 Oct '16

Earlier today I installed my relay and thought everything was good. Now looking at the arm I no longer think so. (1) Events (TOR/ARM NOTICE - ERR): x 23:07:41 [ARM_NOTICE] Unable to prepopulate bandwidth information (insuffic- x ient uptime) x 23:07:41 [ARM_WARN] The torrc differs from what tor's using. You can issue a x sighup to reload the torrc values by pressing x. qj - torrc value differs on line: 3 (2) Events (TOR/ARM NOTICE - ERR): x 23:13:17 [WARN] Your server (207.172.253.216:80) has not managed to confirm x that its DirPort is reachable. Relays do not publish descriptors until x their ORPort and DirPort are reachable. Please check your firewalls, x ports, address, /etc/hosts file, etc. qj 23:07:41 [ARM_NOTICE] Unable to prepopulate bandwidth information (insuffic- If I hit x twice to reload the values it only seems to refresh for the moment but when I restart it's back to the errors. Anyhelp would be greatly appreciated.

3 2

Smallest, cheapest, lightest computer for tor relay
by Tamara West 16 Oct '16

16 Oct '16

I've got a few family members across the country who have broadband they are not using for more than email and social. I wanted to go about setting up a relay at each house can can be run with minimum amount of power and attention. I was considering something like RaspPi or Compute Stick. Main questions (1) anyone else use these or something similar? (2) recommend of strong alternatives suggested? (3) is there something smaller, lighter and cheaper that will do the job? (*) did I maybe miss something obvious that needs attention? Thank you.

6 7

OffTopic: onionoo.torproject.org as HS?
by Ralph Wetzel 16 Oct '16

16 Oct '16

7 7

postfix
by ken＠kenbaker.co.uk 16 Oct '16

16 Oct '16

Do people have an an opinion on running postfix on an exit node? I was thinking if I set up a .forward, I might be able to intercept a few abuse complaints before my provider sees them. Thoughts? Cheers, K.

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] new tor exit relays - callipr..
by nusenu 14 Oct '16

14 Oct '16

> Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Looks like we had the MyFamily > option set with relay fingerprints, not nicknames. Fixing this right now. Fingerprints are the preferred method, don't use nicknames.

1 0

RPi Relay Maximum Speed
by Manny 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

Hello everyone I tried the Internet of things to get an answer, but either I'm too stupid to find it or it isnt there (haha, good joke) Sorry if this was asked a 100 times before... I have a 1gbit symmetric connection at home and would like to donate 100mbit with my raspberry pi 3 model b. Since it has a 100mbit Network Interface, I'm limited to that anyways. What Settings do I Need in my torcc to get the Maximum Speed? At the Moment I entered 12 Mbytes - which Shows up at 96 mb/s in Arm - is that correct and my understanding of things is just the opposite? Max Speed, I think, should be 12.7mb/s for a 100mbit Connection? Sorry for bothering and thanks for the pointers. Oh and since I'm bugging you anyways - would it be useful to add ORPort [IPv6] as well? (same port as for 4 i guess?)

9 14

new tor exit relays - callipr.. (was: [OrNetRadar] Contact: "Rishab Nithyanand <mass dot tor dot" (8))
by nusenu 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

Hi Rishab, thanks for adding new exit relays to the network. If you put them in a proper MyFamily setting you can see how well they perform compared to other relay groups: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ornetstats/stats/master/o/main_exit_opera… ornetradar(a)riseup.net: > 2016-10-07 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Up|Ext|JoinTime| IP | AS | CC | ORp | Dirp | OS | Version | Nickname | eFamlen > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 1 | 1 | 14:06:45 | 46.166.148.145 | NFOrce Entertai | nl | 8083 | 9033 | Linux | 0.2.7.6 | calliprsmallclean04 | 1 > 1 | 1 | 14:07:03 | 46.166.148.143 | NFOrce Entertai | nl | 8081 | 0 | Linux | 0.2.7.6 | calliprbigclean02 | 1 > 1 | 1 | 14:06:58 | 46.166.148.142 | NFOrce Entertai | nl | 8080 | 0 | Linux | 0.2.7.6 | calliprbignasty01 | 1 > 1 | 1 | 20:04:48 | 46.166.148.155 | NFOrce Entertai | nl | 8083 | 9033 | Linux | 0.2.7.6 | calliprsmallclean08 | 1 > 1 | 1 | 20:04:43 | 46.166.148.154 | NFOrce Entertai | nl | 8082 | 9032 | Linux | 0.2.7.6 | calliprsmallnasty07 | 1 > 1 | 1 | 20:04:27 | 46.166.148.152 | NFOrce Entertai | nl | 8080 | 0 | Linux | 0.2.7.6 | calliprbignasty05 | 1 > 1 | 1 | 14:07:09 | 46.166.148.144 | NFOrce Entertai | nl | 8082 | 9032 | Linux | 0.2.7.6 | calliprsmallnasty03 | 1 > 1 | 1 | 20:04:35 | 46.166.148.153 | NFOrce Entertai | nl | 8081 | 0 | Linux | 0.2.7.6 | calliprbigclean06 | 1 > Fingerprints: > 1C486B378AF54474F35CA3B1A00203BD659BDDB1,766AF475D17EEF41C056A6E3E555BD3B023641A6,C065FE07B0D3035B534E05243B9773E3ED1CCBD4,E591E57FDCDBE475017A0938D8603C1783FB48BD,A9699FFAC625DB75118745E6D169A819047006F4,2EF563C70D1B407FB70DDEDA74FF9658D0B31503,339238AD6B44F949CD6F1C59E2CD4249585B4A77,C62A865581FA1319D62C5B14434952A3D37BB57B >

1 0

monitoring the relay : zabbix?
by krishna e bera 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

How do you monitor the tor relay server and the relay itself, on a remote box? Zabbix seemed to have less overhead and simpler setup than nagios or icinga, so i started to set it up. Then i saw the note on https://www.torservers.net/wiki/setup/zabbix that they do not use it anymore, and i am wondering what is wrong with it.

4 4

Politically correct?
by torserver＠datakanja.de 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

Hello list members, for simple - political - reasons, i began contributing otherwise wasted bandwith to the tor network about half a year ago. And i am reading this list. Lately, there has been a discussion (Intrusion Prevention System Software - Snort or Suricata), that brought up some opinions about tor, more or less focused from a technical point-of-view. Interesting to me (the noob, that i am) was the belief, that tor was ok (as some seem to think). I am very much less optimistic: >From the information, i can gather on my own personal computer, i can see, that almost every operating system sends out greetings to servers in akamai's reach, a company that happens to have contracts with microsoft and whatnot. Reading about their business, i find every reason to believe, that the time to fight for anonymity on the net is long gone, that security - even from their perspective - needs more resources than any individual will ever be able to have at its disposal. Also, i am aware of the possibility to get tracked by the telecommunication provider anytime and without me noticing it. My conclusion has been, that i am maybe 30 years too late in my activity to support tor - as a simple relay -. And the companies that seem to have most control over the internet (like google, akamai, and others) are in the process to control more and more of it, and only for that reason are fighting against malware like viruses and bots, and of course also fighting tor (by using honeypots as well as intrusion into the community to get as much information as possible about the people trying to hide in anonymity). This seems to be so true to me, that i begin to feel _guilty of nourishing false hopes_, that any individual could feel safe by using tor, irrespective of where and how legitimate/needed their requests are originating from. Seriously, i am beginning to think, that tor may be somewhat outdated nowadays, basically operating on old assumptions, about how the net was organised merely a decade ago. And not taking into account the reality of today, where our little community may not be all too useful any longer. Hard to hide some disappointment, as i used to be a developer many years ago, and find that no one - apart from myself - refuses to cooperate in the process of accumulating data, which provides the basis for semi-automated analysis later, and help some authorities to excert power and control over the population living on this planet. As my son very correctly said (btw: on his mobile! ;-)) : "Today, life begins, where there is neither computer nor electricity, but meeting with friends." ...until the earth observing satelites will be able to discern individuals. :-( Can anyone get me out of this pessimistic viewpoint? If not, i am seriously reconsidering the futile attempt to engage into offering something to the net, that could lead to unveiling users activities opposed to what tor seems to promise. Sorry for thinking out loud, but seriously worried about my own simple-mindedness. The operator of "NewTorKidOnTheBlock"

6 5

Re: [tor-relays] TOR Services on Microsoft Azure
by Volker Mink 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

3 3

OBFS4 Bridge
by pvr6＠sigaint.org 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

Have been running an obfs3 bridge for a while. Since I was building a new Debian server wanted to add obfs4, but when I configure TBB to point to the obfs4 port [Z] I get "general SOCKS failure" in the TBB log. Changing it back to use obfs3 and port [Y] works fine. How can I fix it so obfs4 works too? Here are the relevant lines from torrc: --- ORPort [X] BridgeRelay 1 PublishServerDescriptor bridge ServerTransportPlugin obfs3 exec /usr/bin/obfs4proxy managed ServerTransportListenAddr obfs3 0.0.0.0:[Y] ServerTransportListenAddr obfs4 0.0.0.0:[Z] ExtORPort auto --- If I do netstat -pan, I see obfs4proxy is listening on both ports on all interfaces. I tried to add "--log-file logfile" after /usr/bin/obfs4proxy in torrc but then it wouldn't start the proxy at all. I'm not finding any other log messages showing a problem. Tor's log is clean, just shows it starting both proxy instances (which netstat confirms.) Obfs4proxy is the packaged version 0.0.6. Not sure where else to look or change. I'd like to get it working but have commented out the obfs4 line for now.

2 2