- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Question on running bridge nodes
by Tor externet co uk 12 Oct '14

12 Oct '14

Hi, I've set up a bridge node in the previous few weeks, but have had to put a bandwidth limit on, as I only have 10TB of traffic per month before my ISP will start throttling me to 100k/sec. I wondered whether it was more helpful to the Tor network as a whole to have have a very fast node which hibernated every 12-15 hours, or if I throttled Tor traffic, so that the node was more stable. I'll confess that I'm far more au fait with the politics of Tor than I am of the exact ins and outs of how the technology works. Any help would be gratefully received. Thanks L

2 2

Re: [tor-relays] Slow relay speeds for Australian geographic location(s)
by teor 11 Oct '14

11 Oct '14

On 12 Oct 2014, at 09:32 , tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org wrote: > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 06:19:16 +1100 > From: Mathew <wired.kid(a)gmail.com> > To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > Subject: [tor-relays] Slow relay speeds for Australian geographic > location(s) > > Hello all, > > I run a non-exit relay in Australia. My relay has been running for almost > 15 days and has seen very little traffic. > I have a 100/40 fibre connection and bandwidth is set at 2MB/s and 2.5MB/s > burst. > > The mean read/write is 3.22kb/s and the advertised bandwidth constantly > varies between 100-800kb/s which is obviously a fraction of my available > bandwidth. > > Do relays located in less tor frequented countries see much less traffic or > something? I have ports set at 443 and dirport 9030, is this an optimal > port setting? > > Anyone with helpful information would be appreciated. My relay is 1337m8 if > anyone wants to look at the traffic. > > Thanks A few hints: 1. The Tor network currently has an oversupply of non-exit relays. Therefore, your relay will never be fully utilised unless it is incredibly fast and stable over the longer term (months). 2. Your relay doesn't have the Guard flag yet. When it gets it, there will be a drop in traffic as your relay changes roles from middle to guard, then an increase overall. [-1] 3. If you look at the graphs for your relay on Atlas [0], there is a gradual increase in bandwidth. This should keep gradually increasing, apart from the guard transition in point #2. 4. It's unlikely your relay is compute-bound (at 100% CPU) or network-bound (saturating any network links). But it might be resource-bound (again, this seems unlikely at the levels you're seeing). Can your NAT box handle ~5000 simultaneous TCP connections/open files/NAT translations? (Mine can't, it reboots occasionally.) Can your Windows server handle ~5000 simultaneous TCP connections? 5. Most of the Tor network is outside Australia. How is TPG's international bandwidth for the NBN? Are the coping? Or are they shaping international transfers? (Please feel free to correct my ISP and network assumptions.) What do you get if you use an online bandwidth test server located in the US or Europe? What are your typical upload speeds on the link? 6. The bandwidth authorities are outside Australia. This appears to produce greater bandwidth measurement variance. To measure bandwidth, the authorities build a circuit between it, your router, and another router with similar bandwidth. More than likely, the authority and other router are a long way away from Australia. My experience has been variance between 50 - 120 KB/s on a 120KB/s set bandwidth. (Which is a little too low for a Tor relay, by the way.) And to answer your questions: A. Tor is country-agnostic, but network-aware by default. Faster, stable relays get priority. B. In my experience, 443 gets more bandwidth than the Tor default port of 9001. You could try setting up another instance on 9001, and see if it experiences the same issues after a few weeks. You could also try paste-binning your torrc, and we'll look for specifics. [-1]: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay [0]: https://atlas.torproject.org/ teor pgp 0xABFED1AC hkp://pgp.mit.edu/ https://gist.github.com/teor2345/d033b8ce0a99adbc89c5 http://0bin.net/paste/Mu92kPyphK0bqmbA#Zvt3gzMrSCAwDN6GKsUk7Q8G-eG+Y+BLpe7w…

1 0

Few questions about relaying
by Blaise Gagnon 11 Oct '14

11 Oct '14

Hi and many thanks for developping this project ! I have a dedicated 200Mb (25 MB) fiber optics connection and a dedicated quad-core Linux server (64). What is the best setup to get maximum bandwidth usage ? I'm still stuck at 46.4Kb measured speed and 3,51MB advertised bandwidth. The server has direct connection to the Internet. Fingerprint : 5EF740BB88C75915F8316DFEC8F1C8631FF26F12 Should I run multiple relays on the same machine/IP ? Thanks !

6 17

introduction
by Mirimir 11 Oct '14

11 Oct '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I don't know whether introductions are hopelessly old school on this list, but here's a brief one. Although I've used Tor for many years, it's been just about a year since I decided to understand it better. I've also been catching up on the literature. Now I'm considering the possibility of running some relays. I've read some of the instructions on torservers.net, and have a few questions about security. I'm presuming that this is the best place to ask them. I won't be signing all of my list messages, by the way. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUNy7oAAoJEGINZVEXwuQ+GPQH/imif4StAJPp6io3zBEkt3iu rNN94iZw+EukXnCbVMTKW686H/6l0NbQ+0iHQ+RkUeX7xUcvV7+rqB9E+nIB7bx/ DOXCDvyqOP2uUeYmxgkTxKz33jD3eMV+MGprB/9oCdMozur4yJmKjf+oYY+6+PT5 WO9Xf7rBbL9KuBqOY7iLCpRtLTvg31vkjz8o3pQFeJYm+aKKRnUjcNcwtroxxdUD c8xe5r8CtFkLL0OX8NuaRX2y3WXeu2GS/8fEEv95J3yqFPTCJ6K9hxmwRfbjG7QT wi/SZ2FEfdAzdvXwT3qd4E5CYMB8RKXVqArlsvmKs7EHbZSVzEqbTbzKBYBvckc= =P0Ua -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

questions about attacks involving single-end measurements of available bandwidth
by Mirimir 10 Oct '14

10 Oct '14

In planning how to configure Tor relays, I've been considering various known attacks. Most involve systemic issues about design and implementation, and so aren't relevant to relay configuration. But there is one that seems relevant, and addressable. I've been reading the work of Sambuddho Chakravarty and coworkers, in particular his thesis and a technical report on LinkWidth.[0],[1] What seems relevant here are deanonymization attacks on clients and hidden services that rely on traffic watermarking in conjunction with single-end measurements of available relay bandwidth. I am somewhat dubious about real-world workability. Fast relays simultaneously handle numerous connections, and so it's arguable that no single connection substantially perturbs available bandwidth. But on the other hand, it takes months for traffic through new relays to ramp up, and perhaps they are easier to scope while relatively idle. Regardless, Tor relays are very specialized. And so it should be trivial to craft iptables rules that prevent responses to LinkWidth and other tools for single-end bandwidth measurement, but don't interfere with anything essential. However, I haven't come across anything that seems relevant. Has this threat been addressed? Or am I missing something that complicates the response? Or conversely, is it not something to worry about? [0] Chakravarty (2014) Traffic Analysis Attacks and Defenses in Low Latency Anonymous Communication (PhD thesis) http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~angelos/Papers/theses/sambuddho_thesis.pdf [1] Chakravarty et al. (2008) LinkWidth: A Method to Measure Link Capacity and Available Bandwidth using Single-End Probes http://academiccommons.columbia.edu/download/fedora_content/download/ac:110…

1 0

Need Routing Info on Relays
by Tor Zilla 09 Oct '14

09 Oct '14

Hi Folks, I am trying to figure out how the packet flows over a Tor network.. There is a mix of information.. Some claim that the ISP is not aware of the payload as the complete data is encrypted whereas some say that your ISP is not used at all when using Tor network. AFAIK my packets go to the outer web via my ISP and there is no way to by pass that. I might be wrong. Can someone give me a detailed packet flow? Thanks, Torzilla11

3 8

Re: [tor-relays] . obfsproxy not working on bridge relay
by Jan Nielsen 09 Oct '14

09 Oct '14

I believe that error means obfsproxy was either not installed correctly or your torrc is not pointing to the correct location. Follow the below link's instructions. Also, a quick google search for that error provided resukts from this mailing list. Follow its instructions as well. https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2014-February/003892.html On Oct 8, 2014 6:00 AM, <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. obfsproxy not working on bridge relay (jchase) > 2. Re: obfsproxy not working on bridge relay (George Kadianakis) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: jchase <jchase(a)riseup.net> > To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > Cc: > Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 10:36:39 +0000 > Subject: [tor-relays] obfsproxy not working on bridge relay > Hi, > Due to m limited bandwidth I've decided to turn my relay into a bridge. > I seem to have everything right except if I restart tor I get a warning > that "managed proxy obfsproxy is 'closed'". I'm sure this has come up in > the past but I can find it in the archives. > In torrc I have: > SocksPort 0 > ORPort 9001 > Exitpolicy reject *:* > Log notice file /var/log/tor/notices.log > Contact info [] > Nickname rasptorholland > BridgeRelay 1 > ServerTransportPlugin obfs3 exec /usr/bin/obfsproxy managed > ServerTransportListenAddr obfs3 0.0.0.0:9030 > DisableDebuggerAttachment 0 > > Both ports are forwarded, though I can't find proof that tor is actually > using port 9030. > > Any suggestions? > -J. Chase > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: George Kadianakis <desnacked(a)riseup.net> > To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > Cc: > Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 11:41:22 +0100 > Subject: Re: [tor-relays] obfsproxy not working on bridge relay > jchase <jchase(a)riseup.net> writes: > > > Hi, > > Due to m limited bandwidth I've decided to turn my relay into a bridge. > > I seem to have everything right except if I restart tor I get a warning > > that "managed proxy obfsproxy is 'closed'". I'm sure this has come up in > > the past but I can find it in the archives. > > In torrc I have: > > SocksPort 0 > > ORPort 9001 > > Exitpolicy reject *:* > > Log notice file /var/log/tor/notices.log > > Contact info [] > > Nickname rasptorholland > > BridgeRelay 1 > > ServerTransportPlugin obfs3 exec /usr/bin/obfsproxy managed > > ServerTransportListenAddr obfs3 0.0.0.0:9030 > > DisableDebuggerAttachment 0 > > > > Hello, > > how did you install obfsproxy? Which installation instructions did you > follow? Seems like you didn't follow: > https://www.torproject.org/projects/obfsproxy-instructions.html.en > > What happens if you run '/usr/bin/obfsproxy managed' in a terminal? > > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > >

1 0

Bridges and advertised bandwidth
by Jan Nielsen 09 Oct '14

09 Oct '14

Hi everyone. I am currently operating 4 bridges on VPSs. They all appear to working correctly. However, 2 of the 4 bridges have 0kb/s as their advertised bandwidth while the other two are advertising around 100KB/s. Is there a reason for the 0kb/s? Does this indicate an error in my bridges or simply a gitch? See this for reference. https://globe.torproject.org/#/search/query=acrossthebridge Thank you.

1 0

How many exits can we run?
by Eric Hocking 09 Oct '14

09 Oct '14

Hi everyone, Is there a limit to how many exit nodes we can run?

3 2

Re: [tor-relays] obfsproxy not working on bridge relay - solved?
by jchase 08 Oct '14

08 Oct '14

> From: George Kadianakis <desnacked(a)riseup.net> > To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > Subject: Re: [tor-relays] obfsproxy not working on bridge relay > Message-ID: <874mve973h.fsf(a)riseup.net> > Content-Type: text/plain > > jchase <jchase(a)riseup.net> writes: > >> Hi, >> Due to m limited bandwidth I've decided to turn my relay into a bridge. >> I seem to have everything right except if I restart tor I get a warning >> that "managed proxy obfsproxy is 'closed'". I'm sure this has come up in >> the past but I can find it in the archives. >> In torrc I have: >> SocksPort 0 >> ORPort 9001 >> Exitpolicy reject *:* >> Log notice file /var/log/tor/notices.log >> Contact info [] >> Nickname rasptorholland >> BridgeRelay 1 >> ServerTransportPlugin obfs3 exec /usr/bin/obfsproxy managed >> ServerTransportListenAddr obfs3 0.0.0.0:9030 >> DisableDebuggerAttachment 0 >> > > Hello, > > how did you install obfsproxy? Which installation instructions did you > follow? Seems like you didn't follow: > https://www.torproject.org/projects/obfsproxy-instructions.html.en > > What happens if you run '/usr/bin/obfsproxy managed' in a terminal? Hello, Thanks for your advice! I had installed obfsproxy with apt-get on a Pi. I removed that and tried pip. It took me a while to find out that pip was actually python-pip. (Maybe the Tor website could be more specific about that.) That install went well. You asked me to see what happened after the command '/usr/bin/obfsproxy managed'. It took me a while to find that obfsproxy was installed in /usr/local/ , not in /usr/bin/ . And now, until further notice from tor, things seem to work fine. Thanks, J. Chase

1 0

obfsproxy not working on bridge relay
by jchase 08 Oct '14

08 Oct '14

Hi, Due to m limited bandwidth I've decided to turn my relay into a bridge. I seem to have everything right except if I restart tor I get a warning that "managed proxy obfsproxy is 'closed'". I'm sure this has come up in the past but I can find it in the archives. In torrc I have: SocksPort 0 ORPort 9001 Exitpolicy reject *:* Log notice file /var/log/tor/notices.log Contact info [] Nickname rasptorholland BridgeRelay 1 ServerTransportPlugin obfs3 exec /usr/bin/obfsproxy managed ServerTransportListenAddr obfs3 0.0.0.0:9030 DisableDebuggerAttachment 0 Both ports are forwarded, though I can't find proof that tor is actually using port 9030. Any suggestions? -J. Chase

2 1

Trying Trusted Tor Traceroutes
by Sebastian Urbach 08 Oct '14

08 Oct '14

Dear list members, We are happy to present the preleminary analysis results from TTTT: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1410.1823v1.pdf The conclusions are: 1. We have found that AS-path prediction techniques significantly overestimate ASes and IXes traversed by Tor traffic, calling into question the results of previous evaluations of the network-level adversary threat. 2. Our simulations show that Tor may currently be less vulnerable to an AS or IXP adversary than has been previously found. We also find that proposed path-selection algorithms to avoid a network adversary still leave a significant chance for users to be deanonymized over time due to the errors in path prediction, and these algorithms lead to significant rates of connection failures, even though in the large majority of cases the failures could be avoided with better measurement. 3. Thus our results suggest the importance of accurate measurement both for understanding Tor security and for improving it. -- Mit freundlichen Grüssen / Sincerely yours 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

Less Traffic on my relay
by Tor Zilla 07 Oct '14

07 Oct '14

Hi All, I am a noob to the Tor community and its fun serving Tor as one of the relays. I am planning to setup multiple relays however before i jump into anything further i setup one machine as a non exit relay to test how much traffic i can route.. Not to forget i also read the article on torproject.org which mentions the life cycle of a relay.. Now its the 4th day of my relay and the traffic is almost nothing but as per the article i must see an increase in traffic on day 4.. The machine is ON for almost an hour now and the traffic is too less. Received : 3.62MB Sent : 1.6MB My dedicated bandwidth to Tor is 60 KB/s.. Do i need to keep the machine on 24/7 because as of now its just ON for 3 to 4 hours.. Assuming that the traffic is low on the entire Tor network is this kind of traffic normal or something is wrong on my side..? Your help will me much appreciated.. Thanks and Regards, Torzilla11

5 7

Tor metrics regarding bridges running transports
by Jan Nielsen 07 Oct '14

07 Oct '14

Hi all. I was wondering if these metrics exist? I couldn't find anything on tor metrics. They list the amount of users using transports but there is no information regarding the number of bridges running particular pluggable transports.

2 1

My relay hibernated unexpectedly
by Derric Atzrott 07 Oct '14

07 Oct '14

Hello all, I recently set up the relay zelltor. I just got a notification that it went down about 10 hours ago. From what I can tell it looks like it decided to hibernate and that it will be hibernating for the rest of the month. I think I may have configured something wrong because this was rather unexpected. I want it to hibernate at a certain point, but I do not think its reached that threshold yet. Arm tells me: Accounting (hard) 15 MB / 250 GB 598 KB / 250 GB Time to reset: 31:02:20:23 I have the following configured in torrc: AccountingMax: 250 GB AccountingStart: month 3 15:00 Tor's log files: [notice] Configured hibernation. This interval began 2014-10-03 15:00:00; the scheduled wake-up time is 2014-10-03 15:00:00; we expect to exhaust our quota for this interval around 2014-11-03 15:00:00 (all times local) [notice] Commencing hibernation. We will wake up at 2014-10-03 15:00:00 local time. [notice] Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 3 days 12:00 hours, with 0 circuits open. I've sent 6.08 GB and received 6.08 GB. We are currently hibernating. [notice] TLS write overhead: 6% [notice] Circuit handshake stats since last time: 2039/2039 TAP, 753/753 NTor. [warn] eventdns: Address mismatch on received DNS packet. Apparent source was 216.69.185.43:53 [notice] Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 3 days 18:00 hours, with 0 circuits open. I've sent 6.08 GB and received 6.08 GB. We are currently hibernating. [notice] TLS write overhead: 6% [notice] New control connection opened. Note: I stripped the timestamps out because I am viewing these on a different computer and had to retype them. My ISP caps me at 500 GB up+down data per month, which is why I've capped it at 250 GB. I was planning to adjust that down a little bit as needed when my next month's bill came in and I got to see how much overhead Tor produces above the 500 GB cpa. Clearly I've come nowhere close to that though, so I don't think my node should be hibernating yet... Any ideas? Thank you, Derric Atzrott

4 4

Arch Linux packages?
by Eric Hocking 05 Oct '14

05 Oct '14

Hi all, I looked through the Arch Linux repository, and wasn’t able to find any packages for Tor or arm. Does anyone use archlinux that could create a package for Tor and arm?

3 2

French Flag
by Sebastian Urbach 02 Oct '14

02 Oct '14

Hi, I saw that a lot of services around tor are using a bright blue in the french flag. It should be a dark blue like the one used in the Dutch flag for example ... The following services are concerned: Atlas Globe Compass Oniontip (already fixed, thanks Donncha) If there are more services around that i don't know about then i would like to ask if someone could check them as well. It hurts a bit to see the Tricolore like that ... Thanks -- Mit freundlichen Grüssen / Sincerely yours 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

Re: [tor-relays] scramblesuit
by Jan Nielsen 02 Oct '14

02 Oct '14

When I restart tor with that option enabled I get: " 2014-10-02 00:52:38,199 [WARNING] Obfsproxy (version: 0.2.3) starting up. 2014-10-02 00:52:38,199 [INFO] Entering server managed-mode. 2014-10-02 00:52:38,200 [INFO] No transports launched. Nothing to do." I noticed it says version 0.2.3 starting up. $obfsproxy --version gives me O.2.12 Why is tor starting the old version? This must be the reason it is not working since scramblesuit was only rolled into obfsproxy in version 0.2.6 . How do I get $sudo service tor start To start obfsproxy v0.2.12? On Oct 1, 2014 5:43 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. tor-relays (top mail) 2. tor-relays mailing list submissions (top mail) 3. Re: Bandwidth not being used by Tor on Gigabit dedicated server (Jon Daniels) 4. Re: Scramblesuit (isis) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: top mail <tpmail(a)safe-mail.net> To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Cc: Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:49:53 -0400 Subject: [tor-relays] tor-relays tor-relays ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: top mail <tpmail(a)safe-mail.net> To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Cc: Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:50:49 -0400 Subject: [tor-relays] tor-relays mailing list submissions tor-relays mailing list submissions ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jon Daniels <apexio(a)gmail.com> To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Cc: Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 07:30:37 -0700 Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Bandwidth not being used by Tor on Gigabit dedicated server Thank you for the reply. I have already (months ago) configured the max file limit to be 795552. Perhaps I'll try running more instances... On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Tom van der Woerdt <info(a)tvdw.eu> wrote: > I've often found my servers accidentally bottlenecked by the default open > file limit on some Linuxes. For example, on CentOS 6 this is 4096, which > for an exit node tends to mean ~50Mbit/s per process. > > A single process will not saturate 1Gbit/s. Judging by the hardware > (AES-NI support) you will need 3 or 4 instances running simultaneously to > max the link. > > Tom > > > > s7r schreef op 30/09/14 20:31: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> It has nothing to do with the location (US). There are fewer US exit >> relays than other countries in Europe. >> >> Check the CPU usage too, usually CPU is the bottleneck on high port >> speed servers. Tor does not know yet how to do multithreading. >> >> Do you have AES-NI hardware acceleration at your CPU? This is very >> helpful too. >> >> Install htop (yum -y install htop) and it will tell you exactly how >> much each core is used. Let us know. I see that you confirm CPU load >> is not the fault, but probably you are checking it via a tool which is >> reporting the usage for ALL CPU (all cores) - try with htop and see if >> there is just one core @ 98% usage and others at less than 10%. >> >> If the CPU is not the bottleneck, there is something at your provider >> (probably throttling Tor traffic to balance the other non-tor users in >> the same datacenter). If you built the network infrastructure there >> and know for sure such thing is not implemented there, don't really >> know what to say. CPU / RAM and Network interface is all you can test >> to see if it is the bottleneck for Tor. If all these are off the list, >> there is something upstream you. >> >> I repeat, the location is not the fault here, and I encourage adding >> more exits in the US. >> >> On 9/30/2014 8:52 PM, Jon Daniels wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> My Tor node is not utilizing the bandwidth available to it. I have >>> tried setting RelayBandwidthRate to various values with no change >>> whatsoever in bandwidth usage. >>> >>> Running for 5 months with 99.77% uptime: >>> https://globe.torproject.org/#/relay/1F6598EA09A82E7A5D3131E71A97C8 >>> 06E6FDA4A1 >>> >>> My node has used a maximum of about 4MB/s or about 40Mbps. I've >>> been expecting it to use 10MB/sec to 30 MB/sec. It dropped from >>> 4MB/sec to around 1MB/sec now. >>> >>> OS: CentOS 6.x 64bit latest CPU: Xeon E3 1230 MB: Supermicro X9SCL >>> RAM: 8GB Network connection: 1000Mbps >>> >>> Bandwidth tests show the server can easily send or receive hundreds >>> of Mbps. I have tweaked server settings trying to get the speed up >>> to no avail. >>> >>> >>> Tor v0.2.4.24 (git-549ec02c188842f6) running on Linux with >>> Libevent 1.4.13-stable and OpenSSL 1.0.1e-fips. >>> >>> Relevant config: >>> >>> DirPort 9030 # what port to advertise for directory connections >>> >>> RelayBandwidthRate 30 MB # Throttle traffic to 100KB/s (800Kbps) >>> RelayBandwidthBurst 30 MB # But allow bursts up to 200KB/s >>> (1600Kbps) >>> >>> DisableDebuggerAttachment 0 >>> >>> ORPort 443 >>> >>> ExitPolicy accept *:20-23 # FTP, SSH, telnet ExitPolicy accept *:43 >>> # WHOIS ExitPolicy accept *:53 # DNS ExitPolicy accept *:79-81 # >>> finger, HTTP ExitPolicy accept *:88 # kerberos ExitPolicy accept >>> *:110 # POP3 ExitPolicy accept *:143 # IMAP ExitPolicy accept *:194 >>> # IRC ExitPolicy accept *:220 # IMAP3 ExitPolicy accept *:389 # >>> LDAP ExitPolicy accept *:443 # HTTPS ExitPolicy accept *:464 # >>> kpasswd ExitPolicy accept *:531 # IRC/AIM ExitPolicy accept >>> *:543-544 # Kerberos ExitPolicy accept *:554 # RTSP ExitPolicy >>> accept *:563 # NNTP over SSL ExitPolicy accept *:636 # LDAP over >>> SSL ExitPolicy accept *:706 # SILC ExitPolicy accept *:749 # >>> kerberos ExitPolicy accept *:873 # rsync ExitPolicy accept >>> *:902-904 # VMware ExitPolicy accept *:981 # Remote HTTPS >>> management for firewall ExitPolicy accept *:989-995 # FTP over SSL, >>> Netnews Administration System, telnets, IMAP over SSL, ircs, POP3 >>> over SSL ExitPolicy accept *:1194 # OpenVPN ExitPolicy accept >>> *:1220 # QT Server Admin ExitPolicy accept *:1293 # PKT-KRB-IPSec >>> ExitPolicy accept *:1500 # VLSI License Manager ExitPolicy accept >>> *:1533 # Sametime ExitPolicy accept *:1677 # GroupWise ExitPolicy >>> accept *:1723 # PPTP ExitPolicy accept *:1755 # RTSP ExitPolicy >>> accept *:1863 # MSNP ExitPolicy accept *:2082 # Infowave Mobility >>> Server ExitPolicy accept *:2083 # Secure Radius Service (radsec) >>> ExitPolicy accept *:2086-2087 # GNUnet, ELI ExitPolicy accept >>> *:2095-2096 # NBX ExitPolicy accept *:2102-2104 # Zephyr ExitPolicy >>> accept *:3128 # SQUID ExitPolicy accept *:3389 # MS WBT ExitPolicy >>> accept *:3690 # SVN ExitPolicy accept *:4321 # RWHOIS ExitPolicy >>> accept *:4643 # Virtuozzo ExitPolicy accept *:5050 # MMCC >>> ExitPolicy accept *:5190 # ICQ ExitPolicy accept *:5222-5223 # >>> XMPP, XMPP over SSL ExitPolicy accept *:5228 # Android Market >>> ExitPolicy accept *:5900 # VNC ExitPolicy accept *:6660-6669 # IRC >>> ExitPolicy accept *:6679 # IRC SSL ExitPolicy accept *:6697 # IRC >>> SSL ExitPolicy accept *:8000 # iRDMI ExitPolicy accept *:8008 # >>> HTTP alternate ExitPolicy accept *:8074 # Gadu-Gadu ExitPolicy >>> accept *:8080 # HTTP Proxies ExitPolicy accept *:8087-8088 # >>> Simplify Media SPP Protocol, Radan HTTP ExitPolicy accept >>> *:8332-8333 # BitCoin ExitPolicy accept *:8443 # PCsync HTTPS >>> ExitPolicy accept *:8888 # HTTP Proxies, NewsEDGE ExitPolicy accept >>> *:9418 # git ExitPolicy accept *:9999 # distinct ExitPolicy accept >>> *:10000 # Network Data Management Protocol ExitPolicy accept >>> *:11371 # OpenPGP hkp (http keyserver protocol) ExitPolicy accept >>> *:12350 # Skype ExitPolicy accept *:19294 # Google Voice TCP >>> ExitPolicy accept *:19638 # Ensim control panel ExitPolicy accept >>> *:23456 # Skype ExitPolicy accept *:33033 # Skype ExitPolicy accept >>> *:64738 # Mumble ExitPolicy reject *:* >>> >>> In addition, there's another Tor node running at the same ISP (but >>> by a different person), on completely different hardware and a >>> different router, that exhibits the same issue: >>> >>> https://globe.torproject.org/#/relay/50F37822AFA257B24B3343D9BBFB04 >>> 42E900FB4C >>> >>> For background, I built and manage the network both servers are >>> hosted on and have been doing so for 20 years. I also built both >>> servers. The network is at less than 15% capacity, 99% of the >>> time. >>> >>> CPU load is always at 0.00. Based in the USA, west coast. >>> >>> Ideas? Is there simply less demand for tor traffic in the US? >>> >>> Cheers, Jon >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing >>> list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >>> >>> >> - -- >> s7r >> PGP Fingerprint: 7C36 9232 5ABD FB0B 3021 03F1 837F A52C 8126 5B11 >> PGP Pubkey: http://www.sky-ip.org/s7r@sky-ip.org.asc >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) >> >> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUKvcYAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRft0IANm500IF63yielvNcKqVdXQl >> j1fe532wa+/Ui3x3CCAj05lAEGFZlIhRZG70HQql+A5tTHFOUQbMhkJloXs5OOMC >> XGwMy8f26A6ZbHd4YAtg4p1c6d7YRfd3QJD1k8yERoEG1jEOjtJANCsCuXCult7u >> NyXL1t9UD12KMbTckIchBdqr5k2wA9e+RI8O60jSIq3h06kJ7yDA5yO6JNAvVRPE >> 2FMCxrJ5Bu9wWhp7F4YvogMHXTlcVbVNubOe/D5oBumz7KjsjUPbshaWz3kbXJUY >> 939O2dB5h3OrZkz9MqnlnpPkqcA4yTFZT8J3cXqtnOvKZx9SXhpj6WAXmua/Mo8= >> =IYwa >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >> _______________________________________________ >> tor-relays mailing list >> tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >> >> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: isis <isis(a)torproject.org> To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Cc: Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 23:41:33 +0000 Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Scramblesuit Jan Nielsen transcribed 2.2K bytes: > Hi. > > I am trying to enable Scramblesuit for my bridge. I am wondering if there > is a method to verify that it is working, similar to how obfs3 shows > "registered server transport". There is not much out there about > scramblesuit but there is one mention that the log should show " registered > server transport scramble suit". > > Tor version is 0.2.5.8-rc > > Obfsproxy version 0.2.12 > > ExtORPort auto > > ServerTransportPlugin obfs3,scramblesuit exec /usr/bin/obfsproxy managed > > Oct 01 03:03:28.000 [notice] Registered server transport 'obfs3' at ' > 0.0.0.0:39491' > > Is there something wrong with my config? One way to figure out if scramblesuit is running would be to enable logging, like this: ServerTransportPlugin scramblesuit exec /usr/bin/obfsproxy --log-file /var/log/tor/scramblesuit.log --log-min-severity info managed -- ♥Ⓐ isis agora lovecruft _________________________________________________________ GPG: 4096R/A3ADB67A2CDB8B35 Current Keys: https://blog.patternsinthevoid.net/isis.txt _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

1 1

Nokia n900 relay
by Franklin 02 Oct '14

02 Oct '14

Hi How to setup relay address on nokia n900?

2 1

Scramblesuit
by Jan Nielsen 02 Oct '14

02 Oct '14

Hi. I am trying to enable Scramblesuit for my bridge. I am wondering if there is a method to verify that it is working, similar to how obfs3 shows "registered server transport". There is not much out there about scramblesuit but there is one mention that the log should show " registered server transport scramble suit". Tor version is 0.2.5.8-rc Obfsproxy version 0.2.12 ExtORPort auto ServerTransportPlugin obfs3,scramblesuit exec /usr/bin/obfsproxy managed Oct 01 03:03:28.000 [notice] Registered server transport 'obfs3' at ' 0.0.0.0:39491' Is there something wrong with my config? Thank you.

3 4

Failed to load Scramblesuit
by Christian 01 Oct '14

01 Oct '14

Dear fellows, maybe you can help out. And maybe I missed some information on my Tor version. I run an obfuscated bridge (Tor 0.2.5.8-rc (git-eaa9ca1011e73a9d)) on Ubuntu 12.04 and wanted to enable the scramblesuit pluggable transport. When changing my line in torrc to ServerTransportPlugin obfs3,scramblesuit exec /usr/bin/obfsproxy managed I get the following warning in the logs: [warn] The communication stream of managed proxy '/usr/bin/obfsproxy' 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. [notice] Failed to terminate process with PID '18171' ('Success'). Obfs3-only works like a charm without complaints. (ServerTransportPlugin obfs3 exec /usr/bin/obfsproxy managed) I set my ExtORPort to "auto", pyptlib is installed, packages from obfsproxy and pyptlib are in the right locations and I use the shipped apparmor profile for Tor for Ubuntus. Even if I stop apparmor service, I don't get better results. I thought it was a permissions problem somehow as --log-min-severity=debug --log-file=/home/me/obfs.log won't even create the logfile so that obfsproxy fails from the very beginning. But, as I said, obfs3-only works without problems. Any ideas? Thank you in advance. Kind regards christian

2 1

Bandwidth not being used by Tor on Gigabit dedicated server
by Jon Daniels 01 Oct '14

01 Oct '14

Hi, My Tor node is not utilizing the bandwidth available to it. I have tried setting RelayBandwidthRate to various values with no change whatsoever in bandwidth usage. Running for 5 months with 99.77% uptime: https://globe.torproject.org/#/relay/1F6598EA09A82E7A5D3131E71A97C806E6FDA4… My node has used a maximum of about 4MB/s or about 40Mbps. I've been expecting it to use 10MB/sec to 30 MB/sec. It dropped from 4MB/sec to around 1MB/sec now. OS: CentOS 6.x 64bit latest CPU: Xeon E3 1230 MB: Supermicro X9SCL RAM: 8GB Network connection: 1000Mbps Bandwidth tests show the server can easily send or receive hundreds of Mbps. I have tweaked server settings trying to get the speed up to no avail. Tor v0.2.4.24 (git-549ec02c188842f6) running on Linux with Libevent 1.4.13-stable and OpenSSL 1.0.1e-fips. Relevant config: DirPort 9030 # what port to advertise for directory connections RelayBandwidthRate 30 MB # Throttle traffic to 100KB/s (800Kbps) RelayBandwidthBurst 30 MB # But allow bursts up to 200KB/s (1600Kbps) DisableDebuggerAttachment 0 ORPort 443 ExitPolicy accept *:20-23 # FTP, SSH, telnet ExitPolicy accept *:43 # WHOIS ExitPolicy accept *:53 # DNS ExitPolicy accept *:79-81 # finger, HTTP ExitPolicy accept *:88 # kerberos ExitPolicy accept *:110 # POP3 ExitPolicy accept *:143 # IMAP ExitPolicy accept *:194 # IRC ExitPolicy accept *:220 # IMAP3 ExitPolicy accept *:389 # LDAP ExitPolicy accept *:443 # HTTPS ExitPolicy accept *:464 # kpasswd ExitPolicy accept *:531 # IRC/AIM ExitPolicy accept *:543-544 # Kerberos ExitPolicy accept *:554 # RTSP ExitPolicy accept *:563 # NNTP over SSL ExitPolicy accept *:636 # LDAP over SSL ExitPolicy accept *:706 # SILC ExitPolicy accept *:749 # kerberos ExitPolicy accept *:873 # rsync ExitPolicy accept *:902-904 # VMware ExitPolicy accept *:981 # Remote HTTPS management for firewall ExitPolicy accept *:989-995 # FTP over SSL, Netnews Administration System, telnets, IMAP over SSL, ircs, POP3 over SSL ExitPolicy accept *:1194 # OpenVPN ExitPolicy accept *:1220 # QT Server Admin ExitPolicy accept *:1293 # PKT-KRB-IPSec ExitPolicy accept *:1500 # VLSI License Manager ExitPolicy accept *:1533 # Sametime ExitPolicy accept *:1677 # GroupWise ExitPolicy accept *:1723 # PPTP ExitPolicy accept *:1755 # RTSP ExitPolicy accept *:1863 # MSNP ExitPolicy accept *:2082 # Infowave Mobility Server ExitPolicy accept *:2083 # Secure Radius Service (radsec) ExitPolicy accept *:2086-2087 # GNUnet, ELI ExitPolicy accept *:2095-2096 # NBX ExitPolicy accept *:2102-2104 # Zephyr ExitPolicy accept *:3128 # SQUID ExitPolicy accept *:3389 # MS WBT ExitPolicy accept *:3690 # SVN ExitPolicy accept *:4321 # RWHOIS ExitPolicy accept *:4643 # Virtuozzo ExitPolicy accept *:5050 # MMCC ExitPolicy accept *:5190 # ICQ ExitPolicy accept *:5222-5223 # XMPP, XMPP over SSL ExitPolicy accept *:5228 # Android Market ExitPolicy accept *:5900 # VNC ExitPolicy accept *:6660-6669 # IRC ExitPolicy accept *:6679 # IRC SSL ExitPolicy accept *:6697 # IRC SSL ExitPolicy accept *:8000 # iRDMI ExitPolicy accept *:8008 # HTTP alternate ExitPolicy accept *:8074 # Gadu-Gadu ExitPolicy accept *:8080 # HTTP Proxies ExitPolicy accept *:8087-8088 # Simplify Media SPP Protocol, Radan HTTP ExitPolicy accept *:8332-8333 # BitCoin ExitPolicy accept *:8443 # PCsync HTTPS ExitPolicy accept *:8888 # HTTP Proxies, NewsEDGE ExitPolicy accept *:9418 # git ExitPolicy accept *:9999 # distinct ExitPolicy accept *:10000 # Network Data Management Protocol ExitPolicy accept *:11371 # OpenPGP hkp (http keyserver protocol) ExitPolicy accept *:12350 # Skype ExitPolicy accept *:19294 # Google Voice TCP ExitPolicy accept *:19638 # Ensim control panel ExitPolicy accept *:23456 # Skype ExitPolicy accept *:33033 # Skype ExitPolicy accept *:64738 # Mumble ExitPolicy reject *:* In addition, there's another Tor node running at the same ISP (but by a different person), on completely different hardware and a different router, that exhibits the same issue: https://globe.torproject.org/#/relay/50F37822AFA257B24B3343D9BBFB0442E900FB… For background, I built and manage the network both servers are hosted on and have been doing so for 20 years. I also built both servers. The network is at less than 15% capacity, 99% of the time. CPU load is always at 0.00. Based in the USA, west coast. Ideas? Is there simply less demand for tor traffic in the US? Cheers, Jon

4 4

tor-relays mailing list submissions
by top mail 01 Oct '14

01 Oct '14

tor-relays mailing list submissions

1 0

tor-relays
by top mail 01 Oct '14

01 Oct '14

tor-relays

1 0

Loki1 and Loki2 closed
by jason＠icetor.is 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Hey fellow ops, Just an FYI today that Icetor lost two of it's fastest two exits that were hosted with Greenqloud here in Iceland, obviously would not recommend them as an ISP in the future regarding exit hosting. About two weeks ago we got notification that abuse notices were breaking their EULA and would be the reason for the termination. Today they shut down the nodes about 5 hours earlier than indicated, no ability to do data migration or save keys. Needless to say I'm not very happy with the entire situation and how it was handled. We'll soldier on with our remaining two exits and ifanyone is thinking of spinning up an exit in the future Icetor is still able to handle abuse contact for the relay. -Jason

1 0