- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Entry Node Problem
by stealth＠nym.mixmin.net 23 Apr '16

23 Apr '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I just added my relay fingerprint to my torrc file and my Tor Browser will not load. I must have the syntax wrong. My entry is below: EntryNodes (Myfingerprintgoeshere) Is this the correct syntax? If I want to add several entry nodes, do I just separate them with a comma? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (MingW32) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJXGxTTAAoJEH1gNwhiMDZuJioQAIicOI9IG2cAb8ILMr0ZpdS9 7eEsvN9mJj2ojrsVTQfmYK7559/bu3Q/wfXdh5bcnahZ6xvda7U2yuBo2XQFXwmh o8cpLyR5DJ0FOlisgSa3A/Hr5lXCFQ8/65jf51pYAuADvqhyt8HoVJT8M5nK3C+3 U7ge9lKXLRGvcfcgdSBL52PuZoALw3HLCkEqG/YA3ZZ9BDB7GEo43QLz6B/kSNtK asld5bde0hqL5+n6fcx9mqEdJahOKhaOpMR2haqeKbza7ojXkpnsgk029Ifltg5E n7U+deTbN6fSOKAAPUmkEEqJL9lJsG+jvpmTrVC0fba8v2AAd5F0mnHkQdGO/sOL WfRsThV6ROs/1UQQ7ohut5S8oFbFXutpH8BCeW+pBWxl61N3jZEGgpCEbO7Vug81 0pXNv7hiVeZWjpq0GQY1fi7VoO+THq8jL84jwY8rd6h4CXhNzH4im8qwrEtLtY7J b/J0tB7903xcwbr3YikMDJJWnIdTFI511XsopDa+kfxE66cxN+wjBdmJ9LYB0NuK avWKp0RWpeLukzHT0uZueKub1lEBEu/o4305GJooNo0XuiAixcPGcFvWs/QFe+MO SgBsMlde8zWRB3JxAtS+pR9xU9cm8Eo4h9wq8WwMRqTfIqCGViNIIcl8G5gd8lpx +Z5qTFzeWOz4BJ5tb8ai =vDfu -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] Unmetered brandwith hosting
by dan 23 Apr '16

23 Apr '16

> Any more recommendations were I can buy cheap VPS servers were I can run an exit relay https://www.itldc.com they allow exits and offer cheap unmetered VPSes

2 1

Potwin, Kansas
by Kenneth Freeman 21 Apr '16

21 Apr '16

So this is why 114 Tor exit nodes are apparently operating from Potwin, Kansas! Figured it was a digital artifact. The article doesn't mention Tor itself, but the nominal fount really jumps out on TorFlow. http://fusion.net/story/287592/internet-mapping-glitch-kansas-farm/ https://torflow.uncharted.software/

2 1

I am failing with newbie stuff :((((
by Markus Koch 20 Apr '16

20 Apr '16

hi there, just got 3 new didiservers and would like to move my old tor nodes over to the brand new hardware. I am running the latest Debian version. I copied /etc/tor/* and /var/lib/tor/* to the new servers. I thought this should do the trick that I get the same key etc and Tor will think this is my old node but with a new IP? It doesnt, whats my mistake? Thanks for reading, Markus

2 1

DDoS on middle nodes?
by Lukas Erlacher 19 Apr '16

19 Apr '16

Hi, my hoster notified me about nullrouting due to packet floods (?) against two diffferent relays on April 12 and April 17. Has this been happening to other people in the same time frame? Best, Luke

3 2

dutch tor relay operator meetup
by Jurre van Bergen 18 Apr '16

18 Apr '16

Hey everybody, I'd like to invite you to the first Dutch Tor relay operator meetup organized by Bits of Freedom and stichting HVIV(https://hartvoorinternetvrijheid.nl/) The first meeting[1] will take place on the 11th of May in Utrecht, in the center of the Netherlands. The cafe where we'll meet and the program will be e-mailed later. It would be great if you could let me know in a private e-mail if you'd like to come so we can find an accommodating cafe where this will take place. First drink' on us! Best, Jurre [1] https://bof.nl/2016/04/18/11-mei-cafe-avond-voor-tor-node-beheerders/

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] [tor-dev] prop224: HSDir caches question with OOM
by Tim Wilson-Brown - teor 18 Apr '16

18 Apr '16

> On 18 Apr 2016, at 20:18, George Kadianakis <desnacked(a)riseup.net> wrote: > > PS: We could also in theory imagine writing those descriptors on disk, and only > caching the ones that we have received requests for lately. This way we > would not utilize our RAM that much… Hmm, there is a disk DoS risk here, particularly for relays with smaller disks. Tim Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP 968F094B ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n

1 0

List Problem
by stealth＠nym.mixmin.net 17 Apr '16

17 Apr '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I am no longer getting updates to this email address as I used to. Can someone please let me know what I need to do to get these started again? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (MingW32) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJXEmjLAAoJEH1gNwhiMDZuHx8P/ibfH9ORF2n7oxpleuF9mK5V R1r8m6rGOPN01h3Zvi9dJQ+fBsmc0R2xbuIXzXBQhw4ehIWTenSmqA44inbqTlLk gBEsUKkuy4bLAqP1QHwg84l6uN34N4j8Ss46HMJGHgJNqdOjouoVC5zGD7lQ1zsg HA19zKndKUvP421sWx9Ds0cUHJ0g2XTlrSU2w0mMVY1yP0RSPPDGNhtdm7U4doQy c21cIWGyGE0p9vHBh7S8Tph1OMRCxvMblhmNksc5zemOJ+HYjAjeTFBrpK9nc4Er wqrd1vRVSDhyFQD/IfsFm2BvB1YuVOpNamvRFEH8CpqPUlQ4xkd5TsYhBssZiHZQ jsI1mTzHHEEqVoTHKg3wDIAk7FmCcZemTlukASmYLZGub71+FRp+qAd0vbj71AKX O04H6SrOno3XCX+zNf9BpRiNGiVA7dwkEHEkSHa949OhIKdffsdioSrRm9zj8ghD vY/boZbgVE4YN4Lp3Ywl9qWELdpUoH/l1Za9MCjyyRD8Ie547EYx72cT/XorQyTs xr1Qhk6ShVt4y7yfpTDbE3lj8ZAbfOkoO2OSX+11C7xfwSC65xaMJfUbmnwMYR8z 3EycBr4/VMEshagTTiU4eeIwb4jaZPvCBvNNdH+9RcMdqsxHr1OaFOaVlO0L2Yf0 ZynlXsHKKvgaZClMQ7Am =ZvhG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

Please unsubscribe me
by Joshua Norvell 17 Apr '16

17 Apr '16

Please unsubscribe me -------------------------------------------- On Fri, 4/15/16, tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org <tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org> wrote: Subject: tor-relays Digest, Vol 63, Issue 26 To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Date: Friday, April 15, 2016, 1:07 AM 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. Using your own Relay as Entry Node (fr33d0m4all) 2. Re: Using your own Relay as Entry Node (Yawning Angel) 3. Re: Using your own Relay as Entry Node (Tristan) 4. Re: Using your own Relay as Entry Node (starlight.2016q1(a)binnacle.cx) 5. Hiding or masking running tor process.. (rush23(a)gmx.net) 6. Re: Hiding or masking running tor process.. (dawuud) 7. Re: Hiding or masking running tor process.. (k0nsl) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 21:38:15 +0000 From: fr33d0m4all <fr33d0m4all(a)riseup.net> To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Subject: [tor-relays] Using your own Relay as Entry Node Message-ID: <57100DC7.9080905(a)riseup.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Hi, I've seen some time ago a discussion about using your own Tor Relay as an Entry Node, but I'd like to have your opinion in the following two scenarios (if it makes any difference switching from 1 to 2): 1) You point at your node when you're in the same network where the node resides (I mean always by setting EntryNodes in torrc, not by using it as a SOCKS proxy) 2) You point at your node from a different network than the one in which the relay is I think that if your node is being used by others, you would simply be one of the lots of users passing through it, with the advantage of removing the risk of a bad Entry node, what do you think about that? And about using it as a SOCKS proxy to enter the Tor network? Do the same considerations apply or is it even worse to use a relay as a SOCKS proxy? I'm sure that I've read about reasons to avoid using your own node, but I don't remember the considerations about this argument... Best regards, Fr33d0m4All -- _____________________________________________________________ PGP Key: 0DA8 7293 D561 3AEE A3C0 7F63 101F 316A F30E ECB4 IRC Nick: fr33d0m4all (OFTC & Freenode) _____________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 22:24:30 +0000 From: Yawning Angel <yawning(a)schwanenlied.me> To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Using your own Relay as Entry Node Message-ID: <20160414222430.78b9255e(a)schwanenlied.me> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 21:38:15 +0000 fr33d0m4all <fr33d0m4all(a)riseup.net> wrote: > And about using it as a SOCKS proxy to enter the Tor network? Do the > same considerations apply or is it even worse to use a relay as a > SOCKS proxy? This is horrible and should *NEVER* be done, assuming any network not physically controlled by you is between you and the SOCKS proxy server[0], simply based on the request (and authentication if you chose to use such things) being in the clear. Regards, -- Yawning Angel [0]: So, SOCKS over an internal network to a VM/magical anonymity box may be ok (depending on your threat model). SOCKS to a VPS somewhere is essentially always a bad idea.

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] Opt-In Trial: Fallback Directory Mirrors
by hwertiout695＠Safe-mail.net 15 Apr '16

15 Apr '16

Hi. > TL;DR: Stable non-exit relays can help tor clients use the Tor > network. Please opt-in! My relay is on the list and I want to opt in! eriador 6DE61A6F72C1E5418A66BFED80DFB63E4C77668F

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] Using your own Relay as Entry Node
by Fr33d0m4all 15 Apr '16

15 Apr '16

> Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 11:54:33 +0200 > From: Michael Armbruster <tor(a)armbrust.me> > To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Using your own Relay as Entry Node (Yawning > Angel) > Message-ID: <5710BA59.5040303(a)armbrust.me> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > Hi Fr33d0m4All, > > In my opinion, you could use your own tor relay as an entry node, > although you should think about it this way, too: Browsing through the > tor network usually establishes a route through 3 nodes from your side. > Always going through your own relay as an entry node means, only two of > the three nodes are changing each time you establish a new route to a > server. > > In my opinion, you are just moving the "trusted entry node" problem to a > "trusted middle node" problem, although traffic will be more obfuscated > for the middle node because other users could use it over your relay as > well. A think that a bad middle node is not really a big problem, compared to a bad entry or exit node... Furthermore by having at least a fixed trusted node, your own (unless someone compromises it..), you are sure that you don't have any bad circuit, i.e. 3 bad ORs. Then I agree that a list of trusted entry nodes can be better than a single entry node.. But I wait for some comments by people that know the whole picture better than me, which I'm still in the learning process. Thank you very much for your opinion! Fr33d0m4All

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] Hiding or masking running tor process..
by rush23＠gmx.net 15 Apr '16

15 Apr '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Yeah k0nsel you got me.. My provider always locks my vps cause I supposed to breach there SLAs running Tor! I tried to explain but they suddenly after years refer to some SLA paragraphs that I disagree with...I terminated my agreement but they won't leave me out before 09/2016 so I always start Tor after unlocking system until locking..looping process😬 Regards Am 15. April 2016 10:07:42 MESZ, schrieb tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org: >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. Using your own Relay as Entry Node (fr33d0m4all) > 2. Re: Using your own Relay as Entry Node (Yawning Angel) > 3. Re: Using your own Relay as Entry Node (Tristan) > 4. Re: Using your own Relay as Entry Node > (starlight.2016q1(a)binnacle.cx) > 5. Hiding or masking running tor process.. (rush23(a)gmx.net) > 6. Re: Hiding or masking running tor process.. (dawuud) > 7. Re: Hiding or masking running tor process.. (k0nsl) > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message: 1 >Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 21:38:15 +0000 >From: fr33d0m4all <fr33d0m4all(a)riseup.net> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Subject: [tor-relays] Using your own Relay as Entry Node >Message-ID: <57100DC7.9080905(a)riseup.net> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > >Hi, >I've seen some time ago a discussion about using your own Tor Relay as >an Entry Node, but I'd like to have your opinion in the following two >scenarios (if it makes any difference switching from 1 to 2): > >1) You point at your node when you're in the same network where the >node >resides (I mean always by setting EntryNodes in torrc, not by using it >as a SOCKS proxy) > >2) You point at your node from a different network than the one in >which >the relay is > >I think that if your node is being used by others, you would simply be >one of the lots of users passing through it, with the advantage of >removing the risk of a bad Entry node, what do you think about that? > >And about using it as a SOCKS proxy to enter the Tor network? Do the >same considerations apply or is it even worse to use a relay as a SOCKS >proxy? > >I'm sure that I've read about reasons to avoid using your own node, but >I don't remember the considerations about this argument... > >Best regards, > Fr33d0m4All > >-- > >_____________________________________________________________ > > PGP Key: 0DA8 7293 D561 3AEE A3C0 7F63 101F 316A F30E ECB4 > IRC Nick: fr33d0m4all (OFTC & Freenode) >_____________________________________________________________ > > >------------------------------ > >Message: 2 >Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 22:24:30 +0000 >From: Yawning Angel <yawning(a)schwanenlied.me> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Using your own Relay as Entry Node >Message-ID: <20160414222430.78b9255e(a)schwanenlied.me> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 21:38:15 +0000 >fr33d0m4all <fr33d0m4all(a)riseup.net> wrote: >> And about using it as a SOCKS proxy to enter the Tor network? Do the >> same considerations apply or is it even worse to use a relay as a >> SOCKS proxy? > >This is horrible and should *NEVER* be done, assuming any network not >physically controlled by you is between you and the SOCKS proxy >server[0], simply based on the request (and authentication if you >chose to use such things) being in the clear. > >Regards, > >-- >Yawning Angel > >[0]: So, SOCKS over an internal network to a VM/magical anonymity box >may be ok (depending on your threat model). SOCKS to a VPS somewhere >is essentially always a bad idea. >

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] Using your own Relay as Entry Node (Yawning Angel)
by fr33d0m4all 15 Apr '16

15 Apr '16

> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 22:24:30 +0000 > From: Yawning Angel <yawning(a)schwanenlied.me> > To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Using your own Relay as Entry Node > Message-ID: <20160414222430.78b9255e(a)schwanenlied.me> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 21:38:15 +0000 > fr33d0m4all <fr33d0m4all(a)riseup.net> wrote: >> And about using it as a SOCKS proxy to enter the Tor network? Do the >> same considerations apply or is it even worse to use a relay as a >> SOCKS proxy? > > This is horrible and should *NEVER* be done, assuming any network not > physically controlled by you is between you and the SOCKS proxy > server[0], simply based on the request (and authentication if you > chose to use such things) being in the clear. > > Regards, > > -- > Yawning Angel > > [0]: So, SOCKS over an internal network to a VM/magical anonymity box > may be ok (depending on your threat model). SOCKS to a VPS somewhere > is essentially always a bad idea. Hi Yawning, I perfectly understand your point... I'm using it as a SOCSK proxy only within my own LAN, which is only used by me. If I ever need to reach it from the outside I would do it by tunnelink the SOCKS connection within an SSH connection to my LAN. But I'm far more interested in what you think about using your own Tor relay as Entry Node, which I think should decrease the risks because it is for sure a not-bad Entry Node. What do you think about this point? Thank you for the answers. Fr33d0m4All -- _____________________________________________________________ PGP Key: 0DA8 7293 D561 3AEE A3C0 7F63 101F 316A F30E ECB4 IRC Nick: fr33d0m4all (OFTC & Freenode) _____________________________________________________________

2 1

Hiding or masking running tor process..
by rush23＠gmx.net 15 Apr '16

15 Apr '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Hey everybody, is there any way to hide running a tor process on a server?? My vps hoster monitors which processes consume most of the resources, so just hiding would be best especially when it looks like a 'not tor' process..😉 I appreciate any helpful hints... Cheers 0x23 - -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFhwweDIzIDxydXNoMjNAZ214Lm5ldD4FAlcQgJkACgkQOKD1ON7f MNhrpA/+KH3CXchdIH5ZpXsYe4rDUO2bCAo0lAtZHOogzngmqtJg22Tb9aKnSLBQ sLrtRLHgvGS17Ru3bzSqcSh7SE5vlKi3fFuRqB4f7aWHBreBKLCuOXOsp8YLjf2n f/KZxa0h9lATtjvhG8dKNUVZ7pBEX1awQPO56fkapbArqAg/dKPgggAlmcAhLgO+ 4jjPuk8B+fUlgVtRPaK3Igq4YTyRTkrQmiozM0q7A/4Jj1Sw2Bi8QBoUk1vCOR9y CBbrH7t/kkvts7DhmngjJX6Dc1bPCMkHAAisu+NhUXMVH6SMRrfVzJNR1sgD6BYO oq8J35xYQKCmppLrHRCQ/6YMqDnX27rk3z672AD8EiqZz4uynlrljsNnodmzIzbe eFog7KXaOjIcVH+EUpU1wAXIb0klg3mI9GfA6CYq342xPnNXVoyVqZOTdt3BlZpx rbF6M6ihF1YH2/RQluckCyUkxaO6sG9zPbtCY1LVLvppOHCRjNIPVxJ/pWhBbyQz Q4SH7VSJwS8KVtxa/yZe4sX4+h0lY/Opkg0F20Rsmf4522YCsn2rEYk5VveNj1yd NJ7mHqldfghp4IRROhneLX9tXz2S/hZtcibsWpnuaVC6n83yosAiErSEUbCHHmDI ZCFlfCO1UhvFGFiGanpLez62b1GGn/KHq0BeUzuIpHkXVK6mxRg= =Ovl+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

Re: [tor-relays] Using your own Relay as Entry Node
by starlight.2016q1＠binnacle.cx 15 Apr '16

15 Apr '16

You may find the information in this ticket of interest, particularly the cited comment: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/16824#comment:23

1 0

Using your own Relay as Entry Node
by fr33d0m4all 14 Apr '16

14 Apr '16

Hi, I've seen some time ago a discussion about using your own Tor Relay as an Entry Node, but I'd like to have your opinion in the following two scenarios (if it makes any difference switching from 1 to 2): 1) You point at your node when you're in the same network where the node resides (I mean always by setting EntryNodes in torrc, not by using it as a SOCKS proxy) 2) You point at your node from a different network than the one in which the relay is I think that if your node is being used by others, you would simply be one of the lots of users passing through it, with the advantage of removing the risk of a bad Entry node, what do you think about that? And about using it as a SOCKS proxy to enter the Tor network? Do the same considerations apply or is it even worse to use a relay as a SOCKS proxy? I'm sure that I've read about reasons to avoid using your own node, but I don't remember the considerations about this argument... Best regards, Fr33d0m4All -- _____________________________________________________________ PGP Key: 0DA8 7293 D561 3AEE A3C0 7F63 101F 316A F30E ECB4 IRC Nick: fr33d0m4all (OFTC & Freenode) _____________________________________________________________

3 2

First Relay
by KAW 13 Apr '16

13 Apr '16

Got my first relay running for 4 days now :D -KAW

2 2

Unmetered brandwith hosting
by f4aRelay 13 Apr '16

13 Apr '16

Which cheap unmetered brandwith hosting do you recommend me, I prefer using bitcoins as method of payment. Thanks Sent from ProtonMail mobile

6 6

Re: [tor-relays] First (positive) experiences with a Tor Relay on Raspberry Pi3
by fr33d0m4all 11 Apr '16

11 Apr '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 > From: Yawning Angel <yawning(a)schwanenlied.me> To: > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Subject: Re: [tor-relays] First > (positive) experiences with a Tor Relay on Raspberry Pi3 > Message-ID: <20160410182830.2be8c166(a)schwanenlied.me> Content-Type: > text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:52:20 +0000 fr33d0m4all > <fr33d0m4all(a)riseup.net> wrote: >> I've just moved my Tor relay installation from my alix1.c >> embedded system (500Mhz CPU with 256Mb ram) which was able to >> offer only 4Mbps (100% CPU utilization) to a new Raspberry Pi3 >> (quad-core 1.2Ghz 64-bit cpu with 1 GB ram). Some days ago I've >> seen some messages on the ML about Pi2 performance (if I remember >> well) and I'd like to share my first experiences with Pi3. I have >> only 20Mbps connection in the uplink direction, so I'm offering >> about 15Mbps for Tor relay and I've just seen that it is able to >> offer 14Mbps with 40% of a single core utilization.. In >> conclusion, I think that a single relay on Pi3 can offer about >> 30-40 Mbps, and if you run 4 tor relays on the same Pi3 you can >> offer more than 100Mbps which is definitely not bad for such a >> small system. The only drawback is that you need to find a good >> way for keeping it cold, since after 1 hour of 1 core at 100% >> I've reached about 70?C with heatsinks on the CPU. > > If you build tor against OpenSSL 1.1 on that target you will get a > massive increase in performance due to support for the ARMv8 > hardware AES acceleration. > > This requires 0.2.8.x from the maint-028 branch (or master if > you're brave) since I recently fixed tor (again) to compile with > this version of the library, but the changes will be in the next > 0.2.8 release candidate. > > Regards, > Thank you very much Yawning for the news, I didn't know about that! I'm running stable 0.2.7.6 from the Jessie repo, I hope the new ARMv8-AES-enabled version will be out "soon" in the repo (but I don't think it will happen soon, at least for the stable branch, right?) BTW, I can't offer more than 14 Mbps, which are about 75% of my upload BW, so I can live for a while without AES acceleration :) You're work is really appreciated! Best regards, Fr33d0m4All _____________________________________________________________ PGP Key: 0DA8 7293 D561 3AEE A3C0 7F63 101F 316A F30E ECB4 IRC Nick: fr33d0m4all (OFTC & Freenode) _____________________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXCsoWAAoJEBAfMWrzDuy05b8P/iHlAaKeVV4kOjujdENZs2Y1 xppzTRALgQcF+f2617j54zVO3gx9p/FkwEgt2ltqqJH8oSpaONBet6BBIrWL60/0 RUG0SYhtLJKAz722ou5XnP18a+ISt6Jq/peZuBxL5SBwjFg8SM1ibIpFpQlqrWNm 108KqF1TLEUEaRL99QO4lXNSDqTgdp0QzOZ3mkuXcorEgSDtcvtfMSwjUyVsGfVS t2JjYiZNGX36o1h0V3cFzN5pcELK/wkXVktxL0GRpJ3bTsoy5yfz+04QG9qFL6SL 4S/AAZ0GWObR+ZaRDY8Fo4X9PVTwN1qLhnXBhknUKeRl0K5u0ANOPvspxt5YpVaj K7Xb3tcVv958QyN6OIGNySUZh2TZ/7zzfgPj8rk4fWpwkZ2TxC0inLqUNTZrxY1W 9jbXTstp8HCWMYJ/aCO220+iyOFGXv0AeBsk5sr+onbkJxccIC4X8pYtm8DeocdZ +q+rIIJ+KcrJNtDLU/7LM4NhzEkTBfDQnFy3Vy5c68I0N39w3tjYyiNx/4JdoX+L vrLcTOZ09Mavfjbrcww27w1Aixlw0HU0aYlY8dHc5fJcHyc/en6Os9GDEGBpXCNh eptNWIlsNxuk9Pbeipb/1GxQt5X2GyAVoITqpBA7u0TO9vr0V+ZvlyY6Thx7qvpy jo2GqAnJQBfruuSD9ZTo =1lbW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3

Re: [tor-relays] Tor Relays Support of tor-relays Digest, Vol 63, Issue 22
by Milica Đekić 11 Apr '16

11 Apr '16

Hi Tim! I've just started researching www.torproject.org website and doing some practical examination of Tor browser. The great feedback from you. Thanks a lot! Cheers. Milica On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 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. Re: Tor Relays Support of tor-relays Digest, Vol 63, Issue 20 > (Tim Wilson-Brown - teor) > 2. Re: Tor Weather has been discontinued (Karsten Loesing) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 16:26:46 +1000 > From: Tim Wilson-Brown - teor <teor2345(a)gmail.com> > To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Tor Relays Support of tor-relays Digest, Vol > 63, Issue 20 > Message-ID: <4B49C540-F484-476D-B397-13FA5048BA5F(a)gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > > On 11 Apr 2016, at 16:19, Milica ?eki? <milicadjekic82(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Would Tor relays work in a dynamic manner switching from one to another > > from time to time? I am at the beginning of my research regarding a Tor > > network and I could use some support from you, guys. I would read a bit > > about entry, middle and exit relays as well as layers of encryption, but > I > > need more realistic explaination how all of these operate in a practice. > > Thank you! > > What have you read so far? > > Have you read: "Tor: The Second-Generation Onion Router"? > http://www.onion-router.net/Publications/tor-design.pdf > > Tim > > Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) > > teor2345 at gmail dot com > PGP 968F094B > ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n > > > >

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] Tor Relays Support of tor-relays Digest, Vol 63, Issue 20
by Milica Đekić 11 Apr '16

11 Apr '16

Would Tor relays work in a dynamic manner switching from one to another from time to time? I am at the beginning of my research regarding a Tor network and I could use some support from you, guys. I would read a bit about entry, middle and exit relays as well as layers of encryption, but I need more realistic explaination how all of these operate in a practice. Thank you! On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 11:01 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. Potwin, Kansas (Kenneth Freeman) > 2. First (positive) experiences with a Tor Relay on Raspberry > Pi3 (fr33d0m4all) > 3. Re: First (positive) experiences with a Tor Relay on > Raspberry Pi3 (Yawning Angel) > 4. First Relay (KAW) > 5. First Relay (KAW) > 6. Re: First Relay (pa011) > 7. Re: First (positive) experiences with a Tor Relay on > Raspberry Pi3 (Tom Jorquera) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 10:56:52 -0600 > From: Kenneth Freeman <kencf0618(a)riseup.net> > To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > Subject: [tor-relays] Potwin, Kansas > Message-ID: <570A85D4.2060107(a)riseup.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > So this is why 114 Tor exit nodes are apparently operating from Potwin, > Kansas! Figured it was a digital artifact. The article doesn't mention > Tor itself, but the nominal fount really jumps out on TorFlow. > > http://fusion.net/story/287592/internet-mapping-glitch-kansas-farm/ > > https://torflow.uncharted.software/ >

2 1

important DNS tuning for high volume exit relays, fix for Unbound DNS DOS problem
by Dhalgren Tor 11 Apr '16

11 Apr '16

I believe I now understand the cause of exit relay failure when Unbound is the resolver and GoDaddy null-routes the exit. Both to prevent this DOS from taking out your relay if Unbound is running and to maximize DNS performance: with a local instance of Unbound running /etc/resolv.conf should look like options timeout:5 attempts:1 max-inflight:16384 max-timeouts:1000000 nameserver 127.0.0.1 with a local instance of 'named' running /etc/resolv.conf should look like options timeout:5 attempts:2 max-inflight:16384 max-timeouts:1000000 nameserver 127.0.0.1 background material for the above recommendations found at https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18580#comment:11 https://unbound.net/pipermail/unbound-users/2016-April/004301.html

1 0

First (positive) experiences with a Tor Relay on Raspberry Pi3
by fr33d0m4all 10 Apr '16

10 Apr '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Hi, I've just moved my Tor relay installation from my alix1.c embedded system (500Mhz CPU with 256Mb ram) which was able to offer only 4Mbps (100% CPU utilization) to a new Raspberry Pi3 (quad-core 1.2Ghz 64-bit cpu with 1 GB ram). Some days ago I've seen some messages on the ML about Pi2 performance (if I remember well) and I'd like to share my first experiences with Pi3. I have only 20Mbps connection in the uplink direction, so I'm offering about 15Mbps for Tor relay and I've just seen that it is able to offer 14Mbps with 40% of a single core utilization.. In conclusion, I think that a single relay on Pi3 can offer about 30-40 Mbps, and if you run 4 tor relays on the same Pi3 you can offer more than 100Mbps which is definitely not bad for such a small system. The only drawback is that you need to find a good way for keeping it cold, since after 1 hour of 1 core at 100% I've reached about 70°C with heatsinks on the CPU. I just wanted to share my experience with you, hope you find it interesting :) Have a nice week Fr33d0m4All - -- _____________________________________________________________ PGP Key: 0DA8 7293 D561 3AEE A3C0 7F63 101F 316A F30E ECB4 IRC Nick: fr33d0m4all (OFTC & Freenode) _____________________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXCpLUAAoJEBAfMWrzDuy0KpQQAKG1Su24A3O1keFdPGk2zdzw lwEk+pSvRzfoHfmocv5ia9PQ8ZtBws3QfaxfZOYIA0DxdKVK7Rcs+r0ekL6VtAdp y3HU3SlAoCxFDsHycsPhuXZPmQqU/+OAS0lrzo2KrKk/lN/K+b2YYzLfJ+9SWzE1 kg4dcCnWfQrMsLLK72R9qIjSmDsXDGzzNRq0qM3nDjDmE5GPmMJajSbWsHP12v/q BnA786RdB/CDiFVifGPYsKEuughpJ1ryVSRm3LdmTdIjZ+u/sxz0/TQrmj7idgdr TenFk4rf0NbiLU/7sruNJNYPFHvUMUOC8Xu7wBJU2LTF/8fcjYOaQp2UWch4aGQa nM4tMetvhEmoGxcEmJSsi2CHdLkMZ8G67gfufb7Gmsmd59q0KvRQktPxqnJ0GJIs 20x2PX2qzXX7P4mKL8nO0aX32OP+1xScuSH/85Lu6Nnh1jL+T81QPjk/CUHB86ho gbuGt154KEnMoKx+w3aXrzSKVH5kRMgWhIcbRt/xELWprx2zsxGM+gIOCdLQ/vXi PugDblYL8sa8Uds6cz0fjNsuCBI19X0NlnmGFAbU9qOHEhUzYpuF4VlH7sOkL0n2 HWkJTSIjizjZCS0PDPeaqj3lOtoFJiYcAxef+HnGEI/5dameIBB/MDJyOrf+oRfL 1kNo6Zd5KqJesnljCac5 =pk6h -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

First Relay
by KAW 10 Apr '16

10 Apr '16

Got my first relay running for 4 days now :D -KAW

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] NPR story: When A Dark Web Volunteer Gets Raided By The Police
by Tristan 09 Apr '16

09 Apr '16

In this instance, it was local authorities, and the guy bought all-new hardware, so I'd say this specific problem is solved. For future reference, how would we even find these incidents? This time it was on the news, but if it wasn't, nobody would have known. On Apr 8, 2016 12:54 PM, "Green Dream" <greendream848(a)gmail.com> wrote: Who said Tor was against the police? The fact is, in the United States, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies have been known to plant malware, modify hardware, etc., in order to maintain persistent access to machines they wish to monitor. Whether or not you think this is valid in some cases or all cases is really beside the point. The question is whether exit node hardware can be trusted after a search warrant is served and the police are given full and unmonitored access to said hardware. As a matter of due diligence, I'd argue the hardware and OS can no longer be trusted in such cases. _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

3 2