- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

badexit 03F84EA2E09CF427A519C65479DC0BF0D72886A6
by grarpamp 08 Jan '15

08 Jan '15

router Tansam 79.143.87.234 443 0 0 03F84EA2E09CF427A519C65479DC0BF0D72886A6 Appears to be having trouble with, or is doing something with, http versions of https en.wikipedia.org articles. They're either blank or stripped of framework.

1 0

missing pluggable transport
by qq1693129601 08 Jan '15

08 Jan '15

When open tor-browser, it says Tor failed to establish a Tor network connection. Connecting to a relay directory failed (missing pluggable transport). The log is below, could anyone help? ----- 01/06/2015 15:03:35.786 [NOTICE] DisableNetwork is set. Tor will not make or accept non-control network connections. Shutting down all existing connections. 01/06/2015 15:03:35.786 [NOTICE] Opening Socks listener on 127.0.0.1:9150 01/06/2015 15:03:36.711 [WARN] The communication stream of managed proxy './TorBrowser/Tor/PluggableTransports/fteproxy.bin' is 'closed'. Most probably the managed proxy stopped running. This might be a bug of the managed proxy, a bug of Tor, or a misconfiguration. Please enable logging on your managed proxy and check the logs for errors. 01/06/2015 15:03:36.711 [NOTICE] Failed to terminate process with PID '30230' ('Success'). 01/06/2015 15:03:37.711 [NOTICE] Bootstrapped 5%: Connecting to directory server 01/06/2015 15:03:37.711 [WARN] We were supposed to connect to bridge '[2001:49f0:d002:1::2]:80' using pluggable transport 'fte', but we can't find a pluggable transport proxy supporting 'fte'. This can happen if you haven't provided a ClientTransportPlugin line, or if your pluggable transport proxy stopped running. 01/06/2015 15:03:37.712 [WARN] Problem bootstrapping. Stuck at 5%: Connecting to directory server. (Can't connect to bridge; PT_MISSING; count 1; recommendation warn) 01/06/2015 15:03:39.270 [WARN] We were supposed to connect to bridge '[2001:49f0:d00a:1::c]:80' using pluggable transport 'fte', but we can't find a pluggable transport proxy supporting 'fte'. This can happen if you haven't provided a ClientTransportPlugin line, or if your pluggable transport proxy stopped running. 01/06/2015 15:03:39.270 [WARN] Problem bootstrapping. Stuck at 5%: Connecting to directory server. (Can't connect to bridge; PT_MISSING; count 2; recommendation warn)

2 1

Exit Node / iptables / massive attempts on DPT 8118 ?
by rush23＠gmx.net 07 Jan '15

07 Jan '15

5 16

Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by bigbudtor＠Safe-mail.net 06 Jan '15

06 Jan '15

Argh - yes you are right. It was fine again last night and yes it is back down to 20. What the hell is going on? I find it quite troubling that nobody seems to know (or wants to say) why these relays are getting disabled. cheers BB -------- Original Message -------- From: tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org Apparently from: tor-relays-bounces(a)lists.torproject.org To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Subject: tor-relays Digest, Vol 48, Issue 21 Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 12:00:02 +0000 >Yours and mine are back to 20. >On 05.01.2015 03:37 PM, bigbudtor at Safe-mail.net wrote: >> -------- Original Message -------- >> From: tor-relays-request at lists.torproject.org >> Apparently from: tor-relays-bounces at lists.torproject.org >> To: tor-relays at lists.torproject.org >> Subject: tor-relays Digest, Vol 48, Issue 15 >> Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 11:05:49 +0000 >> >> >>> Message: 3 >>> Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 11:36:59 +0100 >>> From: Network Operations Center <noc at schokomil.ch> >>> To: tor-relays at lists.torproject.org >>> Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped >>> back to 20 >>> Message-ID: <84a966b4ad0f4d6a230d7b51f1d6b42f at schokomil.ch> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed >>> >>> Mine just jumped to 18,000, again I'd like to stress that I have not >>> changed anything in my torrc: >>> >>> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/3D7E274A87D9A89AF064C13D1EE4CA1F184F2… >> >> Yup, me too. Seems to be back thankfully. >> >> Would love to know why though.... >> >> best >> >> BB >> _______________________________________________ >> tor-relays mailing list >> tor-relays at lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by bigbudtor＠Safe-mail.net 06 Jan '15

06 Jan '15

-------- Original Message -------- From: tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org Apparently from: tor-relays-bounces(a)lists.torproject.org To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Subject: tor-relays Digest, Vol 48, Issue 15 Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 11:05:49 +0000 > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 11:36:59 +0100 > From: Network Operations Center <noc(a)schokomil.ch> > To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped > back to 20 > Message-ID: <84a966b4ad0f4d6a230d7b51f1d6b42f(a)schokomil.ch> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > Mine just jumped to 18,000, again I'd like to stress that I have not > changed anything in my torrc: > > https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/3D7E274A87D9A89AF064C13D1EE4CA1F184F2… Yup, me too. Seems to be back thankfully. Would love to know why though.... best BB

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] how to monitor traffick through a bridge
by starlight.2015q1＠binnacle.cx 06 Jan '15

06 Jan '15

>Thank you very much for all the precious advice. >I am running tor on linux. I second the suggestion of applying 'iptables' to collecting traffic statistics. Lot of ways to go about it but here's something similar to the approach I'm using. By having separate entries for established and new connections on the input side, one can see both how much traffic is arriving and how many connection requests are arriving. Of if your node is attacked, the second new-connection catcher will show huge volumes of DOS traffic. Also note the separate counters for ssh and OR port traffic, so you can distinguish maintenance and utilization activity. Feel free to change all the port assignments as suits you, even the ssh one. The example uses defaults for illustration. Is recommended that the OR port be assigned randomly in order to make discovery via 'zmap' more difficult. 22 ssh 9001 OR 443 obfs3 80 fte 587 scramblesuit 993 obfs4 The 'iptables' file loses the .txt extension and CR characters (addded for easier MUA clicking) and generally goes in /etc/sysconfig/iptables. Also attaching an example statistics display command and output, and a batch job for collecting the information automatically every day.

1 0

how to monitor traffick through a bridge
by mattia 05 Jan '15

05 Jan '15

Hi, I would like to know how one can monitor traffic that goes through a bridge. I have set one up and would like to know whether it is being used or not, and how much. Thanks!

5 6

Fwd: [tor-talk] please advise on renting a gigabit capable dedicated server
by Libertas 05 Jan '15

05 Jan '15

In case there are people that don't subscribe to both. -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [tor-talk] please advise on renting a gigabit capable dedicated server Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2015 19:31:05 -0600 From: Christopher Yeager <jager(a)farmhouseproject.org> Reply-To: tor-talk(a)lists.torproject.org To: tor-talk(a)lists.torproject.org Hi tor users, my coworkers and I are considering getting together to run a gigabit exit relay and are curious if you all have advice as to the best place to go shopping for a server with 1gbps dedicated bandwidth in a location that is helpful to the network. Someone on irc pointed me to this list, but I'm happy to ask on another if it would be more appropriate. Thanks in advance! -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk(a)lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

4 4

new VPS bridge bandwidth under-reported
by starlight.2015q1＠binnacle.cx 05 Jan '15

05 Jan '15

Hello, Just setup a new bridge running 0.2.6.1-alpha and it's working fine. The bridge is running in a Linux container VPS and appears to have an iptables traffic-shaped bandwidth limit of 400KB. Can browse and download files through it with decent performance using obfs4. However self-measurement of bandwidth, after starting at around 200Kbytes has steadily declined until now its showing 8KB and has lost the "fast" flag. At this point the bridge has yet to attract any traffic other then my testing usage--but it works just fine nevertheless. I suspect that latency for small transfers is fairly bad (in the sense of milliseconds, rather than seconds) and that this may be distorting bandwidth metrics. Also the number of bytes transferred is close to zero, which does not seem likely to help the situation. Should I be concerned about it? Anything anyone can recommend to correct it aside from looking another VPS provider? Does the advertised bandwidth have much effect on whether the bridge will be disseminated by the bridge database system? No "stable" flag yet, but not enough time has passed for this to happen. Thanks

3 4

Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by bigbudtor＠Safe-mail.net 05 Jan '15

05 Jan '15

> > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 02:30:55 +0100 > From: Sebastian Urbach <sebastian(a)urbach.org> > To: <tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org> > Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped > back to 20 > Message-ID: > <14aad6973e8.27ae.e04ee758f2dadc1889b5b423dda555f9(a)urbach.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed > > On January 3, 2015 2:03:33 AM bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net wrote: > > Hi, > > > As i recall there was a mail from Giovanny a few days ago and he reported > his relay being down. But he had log file entries like: > > [warn] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") > response from dirserver '128.31.0.39:9131'. > > Any of those in your log ? > No I don't see anything resembling that, although I am seeing these events messages in the logs every couple of hours: Dec 30 07:52:28.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. Dec 30 09:55:29.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. Dec 30 11:52:24.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. Dec 30 13:53:23.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. Dec 30 15:52:20.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] router_upload_dir_desc_to_dirservers(): Uploading relay descriptor to directory authorities Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an extrainfo too (length 3891) Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an extrainfo too (length 3891) Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an extrainfo too (length 3891) Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an extrainfo too (length 3891) Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an extrainfo too (length 3891) Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an extrainfo too (length 3891) Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an extrainfo too (length 3891) Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an extrainfo too (length 3891) Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an extrainfo too (length 3891) Dec 30 17:52:19.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. Dec 30 19:53:18.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. Dec 30 21:39:02.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. Dec 30 23:33:58.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. Dec 31 01:32:55.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. Dec 31 02:52:13.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. Dec 31 05:05:32.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers are reachable. Trying them all again. I don't appear to have any routing issues, resolution issues or similar but don't have logs old enough to see if this is an unusual log event or not, it may be completely unrelated. As it stands I am afraid that there doesn't seem to be any real alternative other than decommissioning this exit relay. It is costing money and doing nobody any good right now.

2 2

Jump in brute force complaints
by Kura 05 Jan '15

05 Jan '15

I've noticed a rather large jump in abuse emails from admits about brute force attempts coming from my exit nodes. I've had a handful of these in past, as you'd expect but now they are arriving multiple times a day, some automated emails, some not. Has anyone else noticed a jump in abuse complaints? Curious as to whether it's a spike in the network being used for abuse, more admits reading logs or just my luck. -- Kura t: @kuramanga [https://twitter.com/kuramanga] w: https://kura.io/ [https://kura.io/] g: @kura [http://git.io/kura]

7 7

Re: [tor-relays] tor-relays Digest, Vol 48, Issue 12
by bigbudtor＠Safe-mail.net 04 Jan '15

04 Jan '15

-------- Original Message -------- On January 4, 2015 11:14:17 PM bigbudtor at Safe-mail.net wrote: > Hi, > > No dirservers reachable sounds like a pretty good reason why your not > getting anything anymore. Did you try to reach any of them manually ? That > sounds to me like there is either something wrong with the connectivity or > it is massive blocking. I can resolve the hostnames and then connect to the dir port on each of the directory authority servers manually using netcat. The relay is clearly still up and holding connections (down to around 80 inbound now, a few outbound and a small number of exit connections).

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by Sebastian Urbach 04 Jan '15

04 Jan '15

On January 4, 2015 11:14:17 PM bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net wrote: Hi, > > > > Message: 3 > > Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 02:30:55 +0100 > > From: Sebastian Urbach <sebastian(a)urbach.org> > > To: <tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org> > > Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped > > backto 20 > > Message-ID: > > <14aad6973e8.27ae.e04ee758f2dadc1889b5b423dda555f9(a)urbach.org> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed > > > > On January 3, 2015 2:03:33 AM bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > As i recall there was a mail from Giovanny a few days ago and he reported > > his relay being down. But he had log file entries like: > > > > [warn] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") > > response from dirserver '128.31.0.39:9131'. > > > > Any of those in your log ? > > > > No I don't see anything resembling that, although I am seeing these events > messages in the logs every couple of hours: > > Dec 30 07:52:28.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > Dec 30 09:55:29.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > Dec 30 11:52:24.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > Dec 30 13:53:23.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > Dec 30 15:52:20.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] router_upload_dir_desc_to_dirservers(): > Uploading relay descriptor to directory authorities > Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an > extrainfo too (length 3891) > Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an > extrainfo too (length 3891) > Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an > extrainfo too (length 3891) > Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an > extrainfo too (length 3891) > Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an > extrainfo too (length 3891) > Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an > extrainfo too (length 3891) > Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an > extrainfo too (length 3891) > Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an > extrainfo too (length 3891) > Dec 30 16:06:34.000 [info] directory_post_to_dirservers(): Uploading an > extrainfo too (length 3891) > Dec 30 17:52:19.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > Dec 30 19:53:18.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > Dec 30 21:39:02.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > Dec 30 23:33:58.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > Dec 31 01:32:55.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > Dec 31 02:52:13.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > Dec 31 05:05:32.000 [info] router_pick_dirserver_generic(): No dirservers > are reachable. Trying them all again. > > I don't appear to have any routing issues, resolution issues or similar but > don't have logs old enough to see if this is an unusual log event or not, > it may be completely unrelated. > > As it stands I am afraid that there doesn't seem to be any real alternative > other than decommissioning this exit relay. It is costing money and doing > nobody any good right now. No dirservers reachable sounds like a pretty good reason why your not getting anything anymore. Did you try to reach any of them manually ? That sounds to me like there is either something wrong with the connectivity or it is massive blocking. > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays -- Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations Sebastian Urbach ----------------------------------------- Definition of Tor: 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and 100% reason to remember the name! -----------------------------------------

1 0

odd list of connections
by TOR Zone 04 Jan '15

04 Jan '15

1 0

Someone broke the tor-relay speed record?
by Justaguy 04 Jan '15

04 Jan '15

https://globe.thecthulhu.com/#/relay/F528DED21EACD2E4E9301EC0AABD370EDCAD2C… Someone just got 149.08 MB/s on a non-exit relay. This is amazing! Would you mind saying what kind of hardware you use for this? Ipredator used https://ipredator.se/guide/torserver to get to 101MB/s. So your setup should be even more extreme. -- PGP fingerprint: 8516 5FFC 011A 6465 D042 6AC1 D719 1F41 B7CE EDFF OTR fingerprint OFTC: FF6D1AC2 13F38B15 EDB21522 D3530A6F 6EE01996 OTR fingerprint freenode: 293FAFD3 1155A465 C5B77015 B65E8AEC 63A1AF21 Full PGP public key: https://justaguy.pw

6 11

Location of Tor relays being incorrectly reported in Atlas
by Joshua Lee Tucker 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

Hi guys, Two of my Tor relays are being reported as being located within the USA within Atlas; these nodes are actually located within London, UK - the location is correctly identified when using an IP->Location service. I’m just wondering why this would occur? The two IP addresses are: 178.62.75.82 178.62.77.54 Thanks guys, Joshua Lee Tucker

7 6

Re: [tor-relays] HardwareAccel: Current proper use???
by Sebastian Urbach 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

On January 3, 2015 10:41:42 AM usprey <usprey(a)gmail.com> wrote: Hi usprey, > Summary: > The documentation is still somewhat vague on the best use of the > "HardwareAccel" option. > > > *HardwareAccel* *0*|*1* The docu is not exactly a high-performance howto :-) > > > > If non-zero, try to use built-in (static) crypto hardware acceleration > > when available. (Default: 0) > > > I could not find a definitive answer in the archives or in > https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/log/?qt=grep&q=hardwareaccel&showmsg=1 > . > > https://www.torservers.net/wiki/setup/server#aes-ni_crypto_acceleration claims > no intervention is needed in regards of aes-ni accelaration, but I would > like to add an explanation or source to this recommendation. > > Question_1: > If my CPU supports and have loaded aesni_intel on linux with OpenSSL is > 1.0.1.j-1, should I leave HardwareAccel off or explicitly enable it? You don't have to change anything with 1.0.1.j-1, leave the default. > > Question_2: > What does "*built-in (static) crypto hardware acceleration*" refer to? > Dedicated hardware, CPU-support or...? It specifically means that you have the aes_ni cpu capabilities / flag. I have seen this flag on dedicated systems and also on vps systems as well. If the cpu / bios provides the flag and all other requirements are met (as stated in the torservers.net docu) you can use that feature on any system. I would very much appreciate it if you would switch to text mail format, thanks. Thank you very much for running a relay ! > > Best regards > > > > ---------- > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > -- Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations Sebastian Urbach ----------------------------------------- Definition of Tor: 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and 100% reason to remember the name! -----------------------------------------

3 4

High speed exit question
by Kura 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

Hey guys, I recently decided to get myself an 8 core, 16 GB RAM machine to use for running an exit relay and was wondering, Tor only works on one core, even setting NumCPUs to 2 doesn't do a whole lot so, how is it even possible to get more than maybe, 300Mbps or so from one relay? Maybe I'm missing something but, running multiple Tor processes is just going to have multiple relays with different OR and Dir ports for each, right? -- Kura t: @kuramanga [https://twitter.com/kuramanga] w: https://kura.io/ [https://kura.io/] g: @kura [http://git.io/kura]

6 8

HardwareAccel: Current proper use???
by usprey 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

Summary: The documentation is still somewhat vague on the best use of the "HardwareAccel" option. > *HardwareAccel* *0*|*1* > > If non-zero, try to use built-in (static) crypto hardware acceleration > when available. (Default: 0) > I could not find a definitive answer in the archives or in https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/log/?qt=grep&q=hardwareaccel&showmsg=1 . https://www.torservers.net/wiki/setup/server#aes-ni_crypto_acceleration claims no intervention is needed in regards of aes-ni accelaration, but I would like to add an explanation or source to this recommendation. Question_1: If my CPU supports and have loaded aesni_intel on linux with OpenSSL is 1.0.1.j-1, should I leave HardwareAccel off or explicitly enable it? Question_2: What does "*built-in (static) crypto hardware acceleration*" refer to? Dedicated hardware, CPU-support or...? Best regards

2 2

Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's
by SiNA Rabbani 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

There was a new line added to authority director configs, which was a response to the recent Sybil attack [1]: MinUptimeHidServDirectoryV2 96 hours That's only 4 days, I wonder if anything else has changed. --SiNA [1] https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-consensus-health/2014-December/0… "Be the change that you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi ----- On Jan 2, 2015, at 2:51 PM, Sebastian G. <bastik.tor> bastik.tor(a)googlemail.com wrote: > 02.01.2015, 19:47 Kura: >> I think something must have happened, I restarted half a dozen or so >> of my relays over a week ago and none of them have been given the >> HSDir flag, which if I remember rightly is a 21 hour flag? I may be >> mistaken but, I would have expected that flag to be back with over a >> week of uptime. > > It used to be a 25 hour flag. 1 day plus an additional hour. > > I think (yes, that says I don't know) the period being longer than 24 > hours had something to do with an attack to get relays under adversary > control in the right position to become a HSDir for some > hidden-services. If one pays for a relays by days an additional hour is > an additional day for an attacker. > > I may have missed something, but maybe it was raised. > > I do remember that changes to Guards took place, like requiring them to > have more bandwidth and to reducing the number of Guards clients would > use. This was due to research. > > Regards, > Sebastian > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by bigbudtor＠Safe-mail.net 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

Thanks Sebastian, That explains the loss of guard status back in August at least. I totally missed that announcement. Back to the main issue, it does look like one or two others at least are having this problem. Is it simply as a result of being in a Lizard-blacklisted netblock? Bigbud is in 85.119.0.0/16. Is the current Lizard-blacklist published or is it only known to the directory authorities? thanks BB > Hi, > Found the snippet with the changes for the guards: > Tor Weekly News, 30th of July 2014 > Once directory authorities have upgraded, they will “assign the Guard flag > to the fastest 25% of the network”. Some experiments showed that “for the > current network, this results in about 1100 guards, down from 2500.” > > -- > Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations > > Sebastian Urbach

2 1

Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by Sebastian Urbach 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

Hi, Found the snippet with the changes for the guards: Tor Weekly News, 30th of July 2014 Once directory authorities have upgraded, they will “assign the Guard flag to the fastest 25% of the network”. Some experiments showed that “for the current network, this results in about 1100 guards, down from 2500.” -- Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations Sebastian Urbach ----------------------------------------- Definition of Tor: 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and 100% reason to remember the name! -----------------------------------------

1 0

Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by bigbudtor＠Safe-mail.net 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

On the 29th December one of our relays, bigbud (6911888F83565892FE23F1B03EB501D80E1E8780) which had a consensus of 630+ and had been running for nearly 18 months (100 days uptime running 2.5.8) suddenly started receiving much less traffic. I have seen a gradual reduction in traffic over the course of the last year but on the 29th the drop off was very significant and I saw in Atlas that the consensus is dropped to 20. When I look at the consensus files it shows that bigbud has a consensus of 20 and that Unmeasured was set to 1. Any ideas please? I upgraded Tor to 2.5.10 after I noticed the consensus drop. Is this something to do with the Lizard new relay flood or something or is there an actual problem with the relay? On a related note the relay lost guard status too a few months ago and I couldn't see why that would be.

3 2

Re: [tor-relays] sudden drop
by Spencer Rhodes 02 Jan '15

02 Jan '15

Not sure if related, but I noticed today one of my exit relays was not operating properly. Turned out the bind server was not resolving properly. I turned off dnssec and it started working again... On January 2, 2015 6:45:30 PM EST, 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. Reduced number of HSDir's (Sebastian Urbach) > 2. Re: Reduced number of HSDir's (Austin Bentley) > 3. Re: Reduced number of HSDir's (Kura) > 4. Re: Reduced number of HSDir's (Sebastian G. <bastik.tor>) > 5. Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20 > (bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net) > 6. Re: Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20 (s7r) > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: Sebastian Urbach <sebastian(a)urbach.org> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 12:25:06 EST 2015 >Subject: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >Hi, > >https://metrics.torproject.org shows a big nose dive recently regarding >the >number of HSDir's. Did i miss anything relevant in the last days ? That > >seem to be the reason why i see increasing download numbers on my >system. > >Thanks for any lind of info. >-- >Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations > >Sebastian Urbach > >----------------------------------------- >Definition of Tor: >10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated >power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and >100% reason to remember the name! >----------------------------------------- > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: Austin Bentley <ab6d9(a)mst.edu> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 13:29:33 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >No clue. I wonder if there's some backlash from a anti-attack mechanism >of >some sort? There was a few attempted attacks against the Tor network, >but >it wasn't anything worth discussing. Check out the post on the 31st >from >blog.torproject.org. > >On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Sebastian Urbach ><sebastian(a)urbach.org> >wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> https://metrics.torproject.org shows a big nose dive recently >regarding >> the number of HSDir's. Did i miss anything relevant in the last days >? That >> seem to be the reason why i see increasing download numbers on my >system. >> >> Thanks for any lind of info. >> -- >> Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations >> >> Sebastian Urbach >> >> ----------------------------------------- >> Definition of Tor: >> 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated >> power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and >> 100% reason to remember the name! >> ----------------------------------------- >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> tor-relays mailing list >> tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >> > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: Kura <kura(a)kura.io> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 13:47:51 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >I think something must have happened, I restarted half a dozen or so of >my relays over a week ago and none of them have been given the >HSDir flag, which if I remember rightly is a 21 hour flag? I may be >mistaken but, I would have expected that flag to be back with over a >week of uptime. > > >-- >Kura > >t: @kuramanga [https://twitter.com/kuramanga] >w: https://kura.io/ [https://kura.io/] >g: @kura [http://git.io/kura] >On 02/01/2015 18:30:00, Austin Bentley <ab6d9(a)mst.edu> wrote: >No clue. I wonder if there's some backlash from a anti-attack mechanism >of some sort? There was a few attempted attacks against the Tor >network, but it wasn't anything worth discussing. Check out the post on >the 31st from blog.torproject.org [http://blog.torproject.org] > > >On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Sebastian Urbach <sebastian(a)urbach.org >[mailto:sebastian@urbach.org]> wrote: > >Hi, > >https://metrics.torproject.org [https://metrics.torproject.org] shows a >big nose dive recently regarding the number of HSDir's. Did i miss >anything relevant in the last days ? That seem to be the reason why i >see increasing download numbers on my system. > >Thanks for any lind of info. >-- >Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations > >Sebastian Urbach > >----------------------------------------- >Definition of Tor: >10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated >power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and >100% reason to remember the name! >----------------------------------------- > > >_______________________________________________ >tor-relays mailing list >tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >[mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org] >https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >[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 > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: "Sebastian G. <bastik.tor>" <bastik.tor(a)googlemail.com> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 14:51:26 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >02.01.2015, 19:47 Kura: >> I think something must have happened, I restarted half a dozen or so >> of my relays over a week ago and none of them have been given the >> HSDir flag, which if I remember rightly is a 21 hour flag? I may be >> mistaken but, I would have expected that flag to be back with over a >> week of uptime. > >It used to be a 25 hour flag. 1 day plus an additional hour. > >I think (yes, that says I don't know) the period being longer than 24 >hours had something to do with an attack to get relays under adversary >control in the right position to become a HSDir for some >hidden-services. If one pays for a relays by days an additional hour is >an additional day for an attacker. > >I may have missed something, but maybe it was raised. > >I do remember that changes to Guards took place, like requiring them to >have more bandwidth and to reducing the number of Guards clients would >use. This was due to research. > >Regards, >Sebastian > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 18:28:48 EST 2015 >Subject: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back >to 20 > >On the 29th December one of our relays, bigbud >(6911888F83565892FE23F1B03EB501D80E1E8780) which had a consensus of >630+ and had been running for nearly 18 months (100 days uptime running >2.5.8) suddenly started receiving much less traffic. > >I have seen a gradual reduction in traffic over the course of the last >year but on the 29th the drop off was very significant and I saw in >Atlas that the consensus is dropped to 20. When I look at the consensus >files it shows that bigbud has a consensus of 20 and that Unmeasured >was set to 1. > >Any ideas please? I upgraded Tor to 2.5.10 after I noticed the >consensus drop. Is this something to do with the Lizard new relay flood >or something or is there an actual problem with the relay? > >On a related note the relay lost guard status too a few months ago and >I couldn't see why that would be. > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: s7r <s7r(a)sky-ip.org> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 18:39:52 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped >back to 20 > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >This was reported yesterday 01.01.2015 in IRC too, for this relay: > >3D7E274A87D9A89AF064C13D1EE4CA1F184F2600 > >The same it was pushing good amounts of traffic and the consensus >weight dropped to 20 with no modifications made to the Tor config file >or anything. You are the 3rd person who reports this, seams like worth >investigating further. > >I can see both of them are exits, but doubt this has anything to do >with it. > >Could it be a measurement problem from the bandwidth authorities? Why >would it happen only to very few relays in this case? > >On 1/3/2015 1:28 AM, bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net wrote: >> On the 29th December one of our relays, bigbud >> (6911888F83565892FE23F1B03EB501D80E1E8780) which had a consensus of >> 630+ and had been running for nearly 18 months (100 days uptime >> running 2.5.8) suddenly started receiving much less traffic. >> >> I have seen a gradual reduction in traffic over the course of the >> last year but on the 29th the drop off was very significant and I >> saw in Atlas that the consensus is dropped to 20. When I look at >> the consensus files it shows that bigbud has a consensus of 20 and >> that Unmeasured was set to 1. >> >> Any ideas please? I upgraded Tor to 2.5.10 after I noticed the >> consensus drop. Is this something to do with the Lizard new relay >> flood or something or is there an actual problem with the relay? >> >> On a related note the relay lost guard status too a few months ago >> and I couldn't see why that would be. >> _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing >> list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) > >iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUpyxIAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRB6MH+wWzDQPlhf+H4KWkoX9J6jhc >GQbL3+YmmZP1Eh941hnE6zaHpk5OUZiDarovBxSdL0FPEyHWlvLJIsFR6VXmfq2s >RB4hId21mKR5HQLNy/at6KP4Xs7dv3Qyid/KCZK3qH82HtJ9Yt9lA6yNTT8uLWmV >zIr1SKAMltBiIVrBWZaNGtqy5NVrGiF3yx2VYuHT7ZORL1l8BVjvG2I9d+/n2n7r >3RdEUKXSeFp/UnLlN5M9ZhHEdQLkioKfUisnkHdPKu7LTvWlVIONCm0t5lHo62xh >MUmbBP+lrWMfmQE8sJaTgmlJKq26Gb+JtG7uXV8k+XOfDokQygnFclJwZtUnKrQ= >=9kZo >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >tor-relays mailing list >tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays -- Sent from my phone.

1 0

Reduced number of HSDir's
by Sebastian Urbach 02 Jan '15

02 Jan '15

Hi, https://metrics.torproject.org shows a big nose dive recently regarding the number of HSDir's. Did i miss anything relevant in the last days ? That seem to be the reason why i see increasing download numbers on my system. Thanks for any lind of info. -- Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations Sebastian Urbach ----------------------------------------- Definition of Tor: 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and 100% reason to remember the name! -----------------------------------------

4 3