- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Re: [tor-relays] Exit policy reject fails
by spiros_spiros＠freemail.gr 20 Oct '15

20 Oct '15

Hi Josef, I think you must put any reject entries above the accept because the rules read from top to bottom. Also, I don't know if this make any difference at all, but I also put port in my torrc like this : ExitPolicy reject 195.113.0.0/16:* #comment here S On 19 Oct 2015, at 22:03, Josef Stautner <hello(a)veloc1ty.de> wrote: Hello @all, I have a probleme with an reject rule which seems to fail. Due to an message from WebIron against my exit relay I wanted to block a subnet. My exit policy looks like this: ExitPolicy accept *:53 # DNS ExitPolicy accept *:80 # HTTP ExitPolicy accept *:8080 # HTTP 2 ExitPolicy accept *:443 # HTTPS ExitPolicy reject 5.133.182.0/24 # WebIron report ExitPolicy reject *:* After I added the reject rule I reloaded tor and thought the case is done. But WebIron keeps sending me messages because of "ongoing attacks" against a host in that subnet. Of course I trusted the reject rule and ignored them. After the 6th mail I got suspicious and added an iptables ACCEPT rule in my OUTPUT chain to have a look if there is really a traffic flow. I just received another mail and checked the packet counter: Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 116M packets, 159G bytes) num pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 2 142 8304 ACCEPT all -- * * 31.220.45.6/32 5.133.182.0/24 /* WebIron Block check */ There is traffic flowing from my relay IP 31.220.45.6 to the subnet. Can somebody please hint me what I'm doing wrong? Link to the relay in case you need more information: https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/29E3D95332812F81F67FF31B3B1B842683D1C… Thanks in advance, ~Josef _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

3 2

Optimizing TOR-Relay
by Volker Mink 20 Oct '15

20 Oct '15

1 0

Exit policy reject fails
by Josef Stautner 19 Oct '15

19 Oct '15

Hello @all, I have a probleme with an reject rule which seems to fail. Due to an message from WebIron against my exit relay I wanted to block a subnet. My exit policy looks like this: ExitPolicy accept *:53 # DNS ExitPolicy accept *:80 # HTTP ExitPolicy accept *:8080 # HTTP 2 ExitPolicy accept *:443 # HTTPS ExitPolicy reject 5.133.182.0/24 # WebIron report ExitPolicy reject *:* After I added the reject rule I reloaded tor and thought the case is done. But WebIron keeps sending me messages because of "ongoing attacks" against a host in that subnet. Of course I trusted the reject rule and ignored them. After the 6th mail I got suspicious and added an iptables ACCEPT rule in my OUTPUT chain to have a look if there is really a traffic flow. I just received another mail and checked the packet counter: Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 116M packets, 159G bytes) num pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 2 142 8304 ACCEPT all -- * * 31.220.45.6/32 5.133.182.0/24 /* WebIron Block check */ There is traffic flowing from my relay IP 31.220.45.6 to the subnet. Can somebody please hint me what I'm doing wrong? Link to the relay in case you need more information: https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/29E3D95332812F81F67FF31B3B1B842683D1C… Thanks in advance, ~Josef

2 2

TCP: too many orphaned sockets
by fatal 19 Oct '15

19 Oct '15

Hello, I had to move my exit relay to another VPS due to the provider getting annoyed by the abuse mails. The new VPS has exactly the same software setup but only 512 instead of 1024 Mb RAM. Traffic was/is around 45 Mbit/s on both. On the new VPS I get the following message (from time to time lots of them): "kernel: [XXXXXX.XXXXXX] TCP: too many orphaned sockets" which I've never seen on the old VPS. Memory consumption is as follows: total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 492560 465600 26960 348 9852 74476 -/+ buffers/cache: 381272 111288 Swap: 1998844 40956 1957888 I'm unsure if I should limit the maxbandwidth in torrc or try to tune the kernel settings (like /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_max_orphans /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_mem) and which of them? Ordering 1024 Gb of RAM would double the cost and could be an option after I got more experience with the new provider and abuse mails. Thanks for any advice!

3 3

Re: [tor-relays] Tools for managing multiple relays
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 19 Oct '15

19 Oct '15

>None of the above :) > >I run these three relays[1][2][3]. > >ccrelaycc [1] has acquired the guard flag in the >last few days (don't know when, last time I >checked it did not have it). This relay is rated near the boundary of minimum Guard rating and goes in and out of the state. >A thing that is bothering me is that ccrelaycc and >inara ([1] and [2] respectively) are both on >DigitalOcean, they are in two different regions >(AMS and SIN) *but*, notwithstanding that they >have an identical configuration, ccrelaycc has >been experiencing 2 TB traffic per month in the >last 3 or 4 months while inara has barely reached >100 GB per month over same period (I use vnstat >and arm for these stats), that is a 20x >difference. I would like to understand this >difference. With a VPS a tremendous number of variables are at work. How heavily loaded is the physical server with other VPS clients? What kind of NICs are present? What type of server, etc? Is not surprising at all that the QOS varies wildly. >It should be noted that both are the smallest VPS >available on DigitalOCean and that comes with 1 TB >of traffic per month but it seems that >DigitalOcean is liberal about using more bandwidth >(I have read a similar comment on this list about >DO). > >jaine is much more recent and it is on Aruba.it in >Italy. I expect that they are much less liberal >about using more bandwidth than what is allotted >so I set lower limits for the RelayBandwidhtRate >parameter. > >For ccrelaycc and inara I have set: >--- >RelayBandwidthRate 1600 KB >RelayBandwidthBurst 3200 KB >--- >and for jaine: >--- >RelayBandwidthRate 800 KB >RelayBandwidthBurst 1600 KB If you have the ability to use 'tc' instead of BandwidthRate (per posts earlier this month) you should do that. RelayBandwidth* are not intended for limiting bandwidth in dedicated relays. Replace them with BandwidthRate and BandwidthBurst if you can't use 'tc'. >--- >What I see in the end are three quite different >behaviors. Given that jaine is at the beginning of >its lifecycle I would give it some more time >before drawing any conclusions, but I would really >like to understand why ccrelaycc and inara are >behaving so differently. I would appreciate any >input on this. Per above, huge number of variables easily explain it. On top of the variability of the VPS, the networks could have dramatically different quality, reachability, loading and congestion. You can look at the individual BWauth ratings for a more complete picture. Found https://collector.torproject.org/recent/relay-descriptors/votes/ where # gabelmoo ED03BB6... Erlangen, Bavaria-DE # maatuska 49015F7... Belgium # Faravahar EFCBE72... ? # longclaw 23D15D9... Seattle, WA-US # moria1 D586D18... Cambridge, MA-US here's Blutmagie (actual bandwidth) _gfs_ ccrelaycc NL 942 98 4.27 L 95.85.8.226 443 80 95.85.8.226 __fs_ jaine IT 216 13 4.27 L 5.249.145.164 443 80 ... .aruba.it __fs_ inara SG 38 98 4.27 L 128.199.148.243 443 80 128.199.148.243 and rueckgr.at (max self-measure / advertised) _gfsh ccrelaycc NL 1987 __fsh jaine IT 999 __fsh inara GB 823 Suggest installing and running 0.2.6.10 in instead of 0.2.4.27. The Aruba dedicated Atom server discussed earlier could make a nice relay, or perhaps the next-up one for 20 euros. Perhaps try running the existing Aruba node as an exit for a month first to see how they respond. With the "reduced" exit policy the worst-case is a pile of automated complaints about WordPress brute-force login attacks. Very minor but how they respond will be telling. The exit policy can be turned off if they freak. LeaseWeb has 49 euro 100TB servers available in the Netherlands--killer exit boxes that will rate high and pull 15000 per Blutmagie. OVH has good offerings as well, including the Kimsufi subsidiary. Despite 'tor-relays' claims to the contrary, Kimsufi apparently will tolerate (at least one) exit nodes: e_fs_ Kiss208 FR 703 10 6.10 L 5.135.152.208 443 444 ks3296627.kimsufi.com e_fsh Kiss208 FR 1503 The above has been an exit for 14 months. Here's the fastest Kimsufi though this is probably a Pentium or Xeon: _gfs_ Unnamed FR 9865 61 6.10 L 91.121.82.25 443 80 ks26969.kimsufi.com _gfsh Unnamed FR 10947 ===== But an Aruba exit is perhaps a more diverse addition.

5 4

Re: [tor-relays] Tools for managing multiple relays
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 15 Oct '15

15 Oct '15

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 20:20:13 -0000, nusenu <nusenu(a)openmailbox.org> wrote: >>> LeaseWeb has 49 euro 100TB servers available >>> in the Netherlands--killer exit boxes that will >>> rate high and pull 15000 per Blutmagie. OVH has >>> good offerings as well >> >>Please consider diversity when adding relays. >> >>OVH (AS) and NL (CC) are among the worst places >>to add relays from a (simplified) diversity >>point of view. Problem is costs in Asia are like ten times costs in Europe. US is double or triple. Other locales still cost more. So is it better to run a 100TB server for $60/month in Germany or the Netherlands where privacy is a major priority, or a 1TB VPS in Singapore for $25/month? Both are presumed easily collectable by five-eyes agencies. The former provides substantial incremental usability while the cost/benefit of the latter is far less compelling. Russia, Ukraine, etc might be better in theory except they surveille too, are less constrained by law and harbor obviously dubious actors (not saying don't consider it). That many independent operators contribute is terrific for diversity in itself --perhaps the most important factor. Choices are not simple.

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] Tools for managing multiple relays
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 15 Oct '15

15 Oct '15

_gfs_ ccrelaycc NL 942 98 4.27 L 95.85.8.226 443 80 95.85.8.226 __fs_ jaine IT 216 13 4.27 L 5.249.145.164 443 80 ... .aruba.it __fs_ inara SG 38 98 4.27 L 128.199.148.243 443 80 128.199.148.243 One likely contributor to the relatively high rating of 'ccrelaycc' is residence in the Netherlands. Central Europe Internet is the best in the world for affordable high-quality high-capacity bandwidth. This is why so many fast relays are found in the region. ----- Pulled the BWauth ratings for you. The median value is selected for the consensus weight. Results look sane. ccrelaycc 2015-10-15 17:00:00 gablemoo--w Bandwidth=1638 Measured=2930 Faravahar-w Bandwidth=1638 Measured=3010 longclaw--w Bandwidth=1638 Measured=3410 median moria1----w Bandwidth=1638 Measured=3490 maatuska--w Bandwidth=1638 Measured=3580 jaine 2015-10-15 17:00:00 maatuska--w Bandwidth=819 Measured=505 Faravahar-w Bandwidth=819 Measured=543 gablemoo--w Bandwidth=819 Measured=544 median longclaw--w Bandwidth=819 Measured=740 moria1----w Bandwidth=819 Measured=767 inara 2015-10-15 17:00:00 gablemoo--w Bandwidth=843 Measured=235 longclaw--w Bandwidth=843 Measured=330 maatuska--w Bandwidth=843 Measured=336 median moria1----w Bandwidth=843 Measured=336 Faravahar-w Bandwidth=843 Measured=1580

3 2

OT: starlight vs. email threading
by nusenu 15 Oct '15

15 Oct '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 hi starlight, is there any chance we can talk you into setting the usual email headers for proper email threading? (decent MUAs take care of this by default) At times it is hard to follow the flow of a discussion if every email starts a new thread (what message was the reply to which email). thanks, nusenu -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVxfCpAAoJEFv7XvVCELh0wZwQAIZ+jOaNTwjYYwQLfl8gIK9j pE+GHGi4mV0R/FSsFAjfkJQzWp1AakaOMR7AeqxWjQmz4HWUyjm09TP+R+x6tfUw /9ilSiZn++p9F/+J++ukUa8ozoi1ogN4XTo/OnJo12udgAAZ/+p5NW4suMO9scId wuDA3JtvLeG7u80j6LEdb28vkS8+cx1OZ1ZExemOUzb/T6i/K+EZx5//lWqzpukJ MwAS/P5n54cyvlD1xn10EUcwazJ3o7cA1d4QthXekgKzl9+EsyZ70n8uJ+1r2tab YDpf84qKjjdOkLVppukZmLXeyznKrAAP1rcpVesSWdlQp9AVgd+XYYm+wBqrUhrL CuQs9qv6CmQKFpc5GlYX7L3fLKrXE1daKBNqIA0o0BJNMrq/PLti2ixwfXZU3GOj a4jDFnXtMFWzDD4Ut2fSR2+aRAjuhtUmWNexN2rF+8KecenfV5Bb09c3I11FygTf 2IWfCPoqSHtTPCq+sLt91T2Hh/zfSV0+ckjHIfaJPFig3KyivBI4B6fY2X2txSxT zRffuHqXknIwUMgFaCjNSl1qlqozTbpN2rVhx14V4KNK7GCFK2/gtZlFb1f64Dyy bTZ6IxWjLFX11hYVI0jPlTp3Usc5j0PkxprXD2IgvrEXzH89zm994jK36n8MK6w+ uctpM8RxpEsoBfQBnlib =RE3I -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 3

Tools for managing multiple relays
by Cristian Consonni 15 Oct '15

15 Oct '15

Hi, I am currently running three small relays on two different services/ISPs. I have two somewhat unrelated questions: * given costant resource (i.e. euro/month) I can afford to run relays is it in general better to run one bigger relay or, say, two smaller ones. * are there any tools to manage multiple tor node? For example, if I want to check if there are security updates I have to login separately in each system and launch them manually. Is this the way I should do this or there are ways to monitor the status of all my nodes and maintaing them as a whole. Thanks in advance. Cristian

5 7

Re: [tor-relays] Tools for managing multiple relays
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 15 Oct '15

15 Oct '15

>* given costant resource (i.e. euro/month) I can >afford to run relays is it in general better to >run one bigger relay or, say, two smaller ones. Based on a past thread, guessing you run __fs_ BV2 IT 344 71 6.10 L 5.249.159.209 9001 None ... .aruba.it __fs_ BV3 IT 344 73 6.10 L 5.249.159.198 9001 None ... .aruba.it __fs_ BV4 IT 312 73 6.10 L 5.249.149.153 9001 None ... .aruba.it __fs_ BV5 IT 224 71 6.10 L 89.46.70.98 9001 None ... .aruba.it which are too slow to be assigned the guard flag. If that's the case, probably the cost the VPSs could cover a small dedicated/bare-metal server which would be assigned a more than 10x higher weight than any one of the above and service many more users. Much more effective and efficient.

2 1

IP and SWIP for a Tor exit node
by Cristian Consonni 14 Oct '15

14 Oct '15

Hi, tl;dr: it is not clear to me what I should ask to my provider about SWIP, if this is something I can set up on my own and/or how I should ask for this to my provider. I have been running a couple of relays for some months (since the last EFF Tor challenge) and now I would like to operate an exit node. I also want to be careful and set up things properly for Minimal Harrasment (h/t to Mike Perry)[1]. I am planning to set up everything in Italy - I am Italian and I would like to do everything here - but looking in this list (at least since I am subscribed to it, it seems to me that there is not much information about running exit nodes from Italy. All the more reason to try it and document things properly. I have bought some credit on Aruba, which is a quite well known provider in Italy on the low-end/entry level (they used to make spots on television at prime time) and I also think one of the biggest in terms of sales and infrastructure. They are not listed on the list of good and bad ISPs[2] so, again, let's see and document (in all honesty, there is not much choice on the list as far as Italy is concerned). After all this premise, I have some questions: (1) In the guide it is advised to "Get a separate IP for the node. Do not route your own traffic via this IP". As I understand it, this is just saying that if one has a machine with some other content hosted on it (e.g. a website) it would be better to separate the exit node IP from the IP that serves the other uses of the machine. Is this interpretation correct? I am planning to use a small instance for now (1 GB RAM, single core, 2TB traffic/month) and use it exclusively for running the node. Does this advice still applies. What are additional IPs good for? My ISP sells additional (public) IPs for 3,60 euro/month, would it be worth or necessary purchasing such an additional service? (2) SWIP/RWHOIS + ARIN/RIPE This is quite unclear to me. all I know as of now, about SWIP/RWHOIS/ARIN/RIPE is what can be read from the relevant Wikipedia pages. How can I ask my provider about this? I have seen there is a template here[3], but it seems to me that this is not really applicable. That case is about a fairly large organisation, buying a fairly large service. I would like, if possible, some indications on what to request from your average Joe. I am not exactly comfortable on asking something based on a templatee I am not sure I fully understand about something I know very limitedly. Thanks in advance for your help. Cristian [1] https://blog.torproject.org/blog/tips-running-exit-node-minimal-harassment [2] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/GoodBadISPs [3] https://www.torservers.net/wiki/hoster/inquiry

2 2

LeaseWeb automated abuse notifications
by Dhalgren Tor 14 Oct '15

14 Oct '15

Any exit operators with relays at LeaseWeb who are not enjoying the new automated abuse-notice system requiring all complaints be acted upon, send a message directly to the above address. Have a solution.

1 0

new relay - not working right
by Bruce Ganton 14 Oct '15

14 Oct '15

Hi all, I have recently installed a new tor relay (non-exit) in a new vsp. For several days now its bandwidth, according to ARM, is in the bits/second and there seems to be some problem reading its own torrc file. Also, while it had four connections for a while, there are none now. Part of ARM quote: [ARM NOTICE] Read last day of bandwidth history from state file (-7502 seconds is missing) [ARM WARN] The torrc differs frm what tor's using. You an issue a sighup to reload the torrc values by pressing x. ..... and for good measure [ARM NOTICE] Tor is preventing system utiliites like netstat and lsof from working. This means arm can't provide you with connection information....... Sometimes I also get that the data directory is not configured but I have left this commented out in the torrc file, being satisfied to use the default. I do get a "normal running" flag on tor stats and a bandwidth of zero. While I am very familiar with Linux in general this install is on debian which is new for me. Any ideas on where I might start to sort this out would be appreciated. Bruce Ganton

2 5

SYN flooding on port 80. - how often does this ppear at exits usually ?
by Toralf Förster 12 Oct '15

12 Oct '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Recently I realized these log messages tor-relay ~ # zgrep SYN /var/log/kern* /var/log/kern.log:Oct 11 13:43:47 tor-relay kernel: [132045.057945] TCP: request_sock_TCP: Possible SYN flooding on port 80. Sending cookies. Check SNMP counters. /var/log/kern.log-20150927.gz:Sep 22 08:05:43 tor-relay kernel: [47670.548282] TCP: request_sock_TCP: Possible SYN flooding on port 80. Sending cookies. Check SNMP counters. /var/log/kern.log-20151005.gz:Sep 28 11:06:32 tor-relay kernel: [576607.272239] TCP: request_sock_TCP: Possible SYN flooding on port 80. Sending cookies. Check SNMP counters. /var/log/kern.log-20151005.gz:Oct 2 08:04:21 tor-relay kernel: [911078.601891] TCP: request_sock_TCP: Possible SYN flooding on port 80. Sending cookies. Check SNMP counters. /var/log/kern.log-20151011.gz:Oct 8 11:35:23 tor-relay kernel: [1441827.102566] TCP: request_sock_TCP: Possible SYN flooding on port 80. Sending cookies. Check SNMP counters. and do just wonder how often this is expected to appear in the mean a tor server and if there's something special to do in this case ? - -- Toralf, pgp key: 872AE508 0076E94E -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iF4EAREIAAYFAlYbvOYACgkQxOrN3gB26U5VOwD/RNq50pluX2afABKTGmNwPQhH qxMGSdL+F1aB1Lf82WEA/j6W9U5QHybtseNlNDKcDmdAG4RlAwDMs6x2Fh4cjErE =dHy8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 2

Re: [tor-relays] why are some exit IPs missing from Exit IP DB?
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 11 Oct '15

11 Oct '15

At 22:57 10/11/2015 +1100, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote: >>Such "non declared" exit IP addresses (OR IP != exit IP) are found by >>exiting through every single exit relay to detect its exit IP. >> >>Since exits can change their exit IP address at any time the exit list >>can never be 100% accurate by design. >> >><https://collector.torproject.org/formats.html#exit-lists>https://collector.torproject.org/formats.html#exit-lists > >Isn't this a bug in TorCheck? >It assumes that every relay has its ORPort IP as its Exit IP (OutboundBindAddress), and most likely also assumes that each exit only has one IP. I opened one a few days ago: #17297: TorCheck fails on new exit egress IP not in exit DB, confusing to user https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/17297

3 2

why are some exit IPs missing from Exit IP DB?
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 11 Oct '15

11 Oct '15

Occasionally I run into a relay such as Bywadu 5A0DE94C95E2276B4BAC974A7D8FC6463C4FE8A4 OR ip 178.33.157.6 exit ip 31.7.58.37 Where the egress/exit IP source address is not found in the Exit DB, shows up negative on ExoneraTor. TorCheck in glaring unhappy RED spits >Something Went Wrong! >Tor is not working in this browser. >For assistance, please contact help(a)rt.torproject.org. Does anyone know why this happens? Many exit nodes have ips that differ from the OR ip and work fine. Don't see any bug reports on it. Does the operator have to submit these manually? I had the impression that TorCheck actually build the DB for ExoneraTor.

4 7

Differene between OR connections and Circuits
by Josef Stautner 11 Oct '15

11 Oct '15

Hi @all, I've the following output of a USR1 signal against the tor daemon in my log: Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] --------------- Dumping memory information: Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] In buffers for *2021 connections*: 6103606 used/6770688 allocated Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] For 2 OR listener connections: 0 used/0 allocated Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] For *1269 OR connections*: 478155 used/573440 allocated Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] For 742 Exit connections: 5625383 used/6189056 allocated Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] For 1 Socks listener connections: 0 used/0 allocated Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] For 1 Directory listener connections: 0 used/0 allocated Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] For 1 Directory connections: 68 used/8192 allocated Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] For 4 CPU worker connections: 0 used/0 allocated Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] For 1 Control listener connections: 0 used/0 allocated Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] In rephist: 567424 used by 3928 Tors. Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] In 7136 live descriptors: 9860168 bytes. In 14728 old descriptors: 20229585 bytes. Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] 3317 cells allocated on *1203 circuits*. 0 cells leaked. Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] Our DNS cache has 455 entries. Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] Our DNS cache size is approximately 184816 bytes. Oct 11 19:16:36.000 [notice] mallinfo() said: arena=119304192, ordblks=6628, smblks=100, hblks=1, hblkhd=1052672, usmblks=0, fsmblks=6192, uordblks=89103552, fordblks=30200640, keepcost=4846928 For my monitoring of the relay I thought having a look at the built circuits would be the right approach and indicates a "healthy" relay. But then I stumbled over the "Connections" vs. "OR connections" vs "circuits" (I bolded the values). Now I'm a little bit confused. What is the right approach to monitor the health of a (n exit) relay? Thanks in advance, ~Josef

1 0

Just wanted to publish a Tor Bridge,
by Yet Another Tor User 11 Oct '15

11 Oct '15

I have setup a Tor Bridge for everyone and I am unsure how it gets published so I will post the info here so it can get put into the consensus. The bridge is 173.246.106.35:443 I hope this bridge will help more users access the network. -- yetanothertoruser(a)riseup.net Bridges I run; * 173.246.106.35:443

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] Exit Node with Onion Pi
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 09 Oct '15

09 Oct '15

At 12:21 10/9/2015 -0700, Green Dream wrote: ><http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856501007>http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856501007 . . . >If you want a box with AES-NI and a gigabit ethernet interface, cost starts jumping up to several hundred US dollars or more, so I find the lack of AES-NI to be an acceptable compromise for the value.Â The latest Atom SOCs have AES-NI. Might be possible to get the best of both. Everything released March 2014 and later: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Atom_microprocessors

1 0

Exit Node with Onion Pi
by Alex Haesche 09 Oct '15

09 Oct '15

Hi all, I'm looking to start an exit node using this:https://learn.adafruit.com/onion-pi/overviewI have 100 Mbps symmetric uncapped internet. What do I need to do to prepare and run an exit node? What can you tell me so I can run this well?

9 10

(no subject)
by 刘东晨 08 Oct '15

08 Oct '15

5 4

Obfsproxy OSX help
by Geoff Down 08 Oct '15

08 Oct '15

Hi all, is anyone willing to talk me through getting Obfsproxy working on OSX10.4? I've got as far as Step 3 on https://www.torproject.org/projects/obfsproxy-instructions.html.en#instruct… but can't find the Obfsproxy binary; and since I have no idea what 'pip' does, even though it reports the 'package' as installed, I am at a loss. Regards, Geoff Down -- http://www.fastmail.com - Access your email from home and the web

2 5

how important is configuring DNSSEC root trust anchor for 'unbound' running on an exit node?
by Dhalgren Tor 03 Oct '15

03 Oct '15

Is it important to configure the DNSSEC trust-anchor for an instance of 'unbound' running on an exit node? I put a lot of work into setting up a new exit and want to take a break, but just noticed this item. 'unbound' was built from source rather than installed from a distribution, so this step must be performed manually. The relay resides in the high-quality German LeaseWeb network and the risk of DNS mischief appears low.

1 1

excessive bandwidth assigned bandwidth-limited exit relay
by Dhalgren Tor 03 Oct '15

03 Oct '15

Have a new exit running in an excellent network on a very fast server with AES-NI. Server plan is limited to100TB so have set a limit slightly above this (18000000 bytes/sec) thinking that bandwidth would run 80-90% of the maximum and average to just below the plan limit. After three days the assigned bandwidth for the relay is going up instead of moderating--looks like the measurement system has a problem in this case. Just dropped the limit to 16500000 to stay below 100TB with maximum load. A good number appears to be around 65000 to 70000, but 98000 was just assigned. What can be done to extract proper rating from measurement system? Tried setting TokenBucketRefillInterval to 10 milliseconds for more exact control but this has not helped. Should an IPTABLES packet-dropping limit be established? Can the rating system be fixed?

7 28

replace BandwidthRate with "traffic control" on busy routers
by Dhalgren Tor 03 Oct '15

03 Oct '15

Routers running at or near a BandwidthRate setting offer terrible latency and induce connection time-outs. Refuse all DIR-port requests with "HTTP/1.0 503 Directory busy, try again later ". 'tc' ingress filter is dramatically better for rate-limiting. For case and 'tc' example see final post https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2015-October/007901.html initial post https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2015-October/007863.html

1 0