- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Re: [tor-relays] Well, what exactly are you trying to contribute with your efforts?
by Conrad Rockenhaus 29 Apr '19

29 Apr '19

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 5:49 PM Seby <seby2kt14(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Here we go again... > This dude just won't stop harassing us with masked advertising, commercial > offers and monetary asks. Every time even the most boring thing needs to be > publicly shouted on these mail lists, every time he does something > extraordinary, something quite unusual that none of you mortals could ever > do like running a middle relay on a small virtual machine, or a 500KB/s > bridge. > Actually, it's not masked advertising for commercial offers. It's nonprofit solicitation to assist other users that are interested in expanding Tor's FreeBSD Resiliency. There's quite a few people that would like to help but aren't comfortable making the plunge on their own. Increasing the number of FreeBSD machines ensures we don't have a single point of failure as the number of Linux machines presently on Tor greatly outweighs the number of FreeBSD machines on Tor. This was previously discussed, but I'm sure you weren't paying attention, but that's where the project started from and it was always a nonprofit project to begin with. In addition, we're now assisting with AS divestment as well, to try to get people off of highly populated ASes so those don't form single points of failure. Which is another goal of the Project, from what I have been told. I understand you may not get that, so I'll explain it as simply as possible - too many middle relays and exits are getting service from the same service providers. We are trying to help provide another Tor friendly service provider to the table (which runs separately from this since that's a commercial operation). When we had are stuff fully online, we occupied all 15 top spots of the highest bandwidth exits in Canada. Right now my highest performing exit in the US is in the Top 10 but I've been scaling that exit down as I'm not sure if I'm keeping my personal items online anymore at this point. Finally, the GreyPony project has been there to make it be able for an enduser be able to easily setup and get going on their first new relay with dedicated support, sometimes people want that extra hand. Before you trash a project before you should learn about it, but all you've been doing is trashing things. Maybe you should try contributing to something and ignoring things you disagree with or asking questions if you don't understand it, instead of just resorting to talking trash about a project. I just makes it look like you have plenty of free time to mock others because you aren't helping others, but that's my take on things. -- Conrad Rockenhaus https://www.rockenhaus.com Cell: (254) 292-3350 Fax: (254) 875-0459

3 4

Reddit is starting to block my relays ...
by abuse net 28 Apr '19

28 Apr '19

https://i.imgur.com/nF3FR0V.png <https://i.imgur.com/nF3FR0V.png> WTF?

2 1

Tor Meetup in Hamburg, April 26th
by Alexander Dietrich 27 Apr '19

27 Apr '19

English: We would like to invite people interested in the Tor project and relay operators in the Hamburg area to meet at University of Hamburg, Department of Computer Science. There will be an introduction to Tor, a Q&A session and a brief announcement about a newly founded Hamburg-based Tor association. We would love for relay operators to meet and discuss ways of strengthening the network. Be seeing you! When: Friday, April 26th, 7:00 PM Where: Informatikum, Building F, Room F-027 University of Hamburg, Vogt-Kölln-Straße 30, 22527 Hamburg Public Transportation: https://www.hvv.de/(Destination: Informatikum) Deutsch: Wir möchten am Tor-Projekt interessierte Menschen und Relay-Betreiber aus Hamburg und Umgebung einladen, sich am Informatikum der Universität Hamburg zu treffen. Es wird eine Tor-Einführung, eine Frage-Antwort-Runde und eine kurze Ankündigung eines neugegründeten Hamburger Tor-Vereins geben. Wir würden uns freuen, wenn sich Relay-Betreiber treffen und Wege diskutieren, das Netzwerk zu stärken. Wir sehen uns! Wann: Freitag, 26. April 2019, 19:00 Uhr Wo: Informatikum, Gebäude F, Raum F-027 Universität Hamburg, Vogt-Kölln-Straße 30, 22527 Hamburg ÖPNV: https://www.hvv.de/(Ziel: Informatikum) Kind regards, Alexander -- PGP Key: https://dietrich.cx/pgp | 0x52FA4EE1722D54EB

1 1

relay unresponsive - relay resumed - stable-flag
by digitalist00 27 Apr '19

27 Apr '19

Hello! Maybe this is the cause why I've lost my stable-flag. Does anybody know how to fix this. The relay runs on a Raspberry. Need any further information? Yours digitalist [Unbenannt.JPG] Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.

2 2

firewall ports needed to run a middle relay
by torix＠protonmail.com 26 Apr '19

26 Apr '19

I need to move to a new router, which, unlike the old Verizon home router, doesn't have a quick DMZ host to which I attach the tor telay's local ip address. So I think I need to do port forwarding, and for that what rules do I need? My torrc config has: ControlPort 9052 ORPort 8443 DirPort 8080 So I forwarded 8443 and just in case, 8080. But the number of my connexions kept dropping, so I put it back in the DMZ and it started getting new ones again. Trying to figure out if I screwed up the config gui, or if I need to add other ports. Did I miss a port? TIA, --Torix Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.

5 6

Re: [tor-relays] Research on the live Tor Network and the Tor Research Safety Board
by nusenu 25 Apr '19

25 Apr '19

FYI nusenu wrote (2019-04-20): > Hi there, > > we noticed your tor relays and were wondering whether you > submitted your research to the Tor Research Safety Board > for review since your email address and amount of relays suggests > you are doing research. > > https://research.torproject.org/safetyboard.html > > https://nusenu.github.io/OrNetRadar/2019/04/17/a3 > > kind regards, > nusenu > > -- https://twitter.com/nusenu_ https://mastodon.social/@nusenu

1 0

ipv6 behaviour consensus
by Charly Ghislain 19 Apr '19

19 Apr '19

Hi list, Last reply from s7r on jake Visser' issue included a link to an open issue waiting for a consensus on a mailing list: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/29570 Not sure if teor implied the dev mailing list or this one, but maybe gathering feedback from operators is a good idea. AFAIC, as avee stated on the ticket I don't find the current setup much confusing. The documentation on ipv6 setup was not as clear as one would expect, I came across what appeared to be outdated docs, and I think this is the area that could be improved to eases operator setup. I agree with Avee that any update on that matter should be backward compatible, allowing relays running behind custom natted networks to continue operating without any trouble. I feel there is an issue in case the operator advertises an unreachable ip6 address in the config. This seems like a configuration error that should be spotted by a self-reachability mechanism that is yet to come, like for ipv4. I can imagine however that directories could be able to flag the relay as reachable over ipv4 and not over ipv6, and that the relay would still be usable over ip4. I thought it was the case actually. Please provide your feedback. ip6 is around for so long, it is depressing to see how hard it is for so many software to provide a nice user experience with it. Regards, Charly

5 6

Debugging relays not showing online
by Jake Visser 18 Apr '19

18 Apr '19

Hi all, I am looking for some help in debugging a strange one.... EO runs ~30ish relays in our /24; but we currently have 4 relays that don't want to play nice and are reporting offline (although look to be online). The effected relay IPs are: 23.129.64.157 23.129.64.164 23.129.64.170 23.129.64.174 The first 3 do show on Metrics, and when they are restarted or rebuilt (we use relayor), metrics does pick it up.. in terms that its "uptime" is updated to reflect the restart, although still marked offline. The 4th - doesn't show at all... it is in the family members though. Looking more closely at: 23.129.64.157 (183C8C6727E2137AF278B3850AD5D9C2304B98C9); using nyx with debug messaging; 2 hours after a restart, I can still see active circuits, and I can see it doing "things" [logs bellow], and http://23.129.64.157 loads (we run the exit page). Is there anything I could be doing or look at to indicate what might be creating such a strange issue? All the other relays in the family seem to be working fine.. https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#search/family:183C8C6727E2137AF278B3… (and all built and managed with relayor using offline keys..). These have been online for about 10 days now. Help / guidance would be greatly appraised... Thanks, Jake Events (DEBUG-ERR, NYX NOTICE-ERR): x 10:48:54 [DEBUG] conn_read_callback: socket 18 wants to read. [181 duplicates hidden] x 10:48:50 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 14: starting, inbuf_datalen 0 (0 pending in tls object). [83 duplicates hidden] x 10:48:50 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 14: starting, inbuf_datalen 514 (0 pending in tls object). [83 duplicates hidden] x 10:48:50 [DEBUG] connection_buf_read_from_socket: After TLS read of 514: 543 read, 0 written [99 duplicates hidden] x 10:48:50 [DEBUG] connection_buf_read_from_socket: 14: starting, inbuf_datalen 0 (0 pending in tls object). at_most 16448. [105 duplicates hidden] x 10:48:50 [DEBUG] conn_read_callback: socket 14 wants to read. [83 duplicates hidden] x 10:48:43 [INFO] update_consensus_router_descriptor_downloads: 0 router descriptors downloadable. 0 delayed; 6722 present (0 of those were in old_routers); 0 would_reject; 0 wouldnt_use; 0 in progress. [9 duplicates hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 25: starting, inbuf_datalen 0 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 25: starting, inbuf_datalen 514 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] conn_read_callback: socket 25 wants to read. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 17: starting, inbuf_datalen 0 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 17: starting, inbuf_datalen 514 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] conn_read_callback: socket 17 wants to read. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] connection_handle_write_impl: After TLS write of 514: 0 read, 543 written [17 duplicates hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] flush_chunk_tls: flushed 514 bytes, 0 ready to flush, 0 remain. [17 duplicates hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] conn_write_callback: socket 25 wants to write. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] conn_write_callback: socket 17 wants to write. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] run_connection_housekeeping: Sending keepalive to (199.58.81.140:443) [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:39 [DEBUG] run_connection_housekeeping: Sending keepalive to (154.35.175.225:443) [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:16 [INFO] routerlist_remove_old_routers: We have 6869 live routers and 820 old router descriptors. [8 duplicates hidden] x 10:48:16 [DEBUG] resolve_my_address: Resolved Address to '23.129.64.157'. [8 duplicates hidden] x 10:48:13 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 23: starting, inbuf_datalen 0 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:13 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 23: starting, inbuf_datalen 514 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:13 [DEBUG] conn_read_callback: socket 23 wants to read. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:13 [DEBUG] conn_write_callback: socket 23 wants to write. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:13 [DEBUG] run_connection_housekeeping: Sending keepalive to (128.31.0.34:9101) [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:09 [DEBUG] conn_write_callback: socket 14 wants to write. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:48:09 [DEBUG] run_connection_housekeeping: Sending keepalive to (217.20.130.72:9001) [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:53 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 21: starting, inbuf_datalen 0 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:53 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 21: starting, inbuf_datalen 514 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:53 [DEBUG] conn_read_callback: socket 21 wants to read. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:53 [DEBUG] conn_write_callback: socket 21 wants to write. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:53 [DEBUG] run_connection_housekeeping: Sending keepalive to (194.109.206.212:443) [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:40 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 20: starting, inbuf_datalen 0 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:40 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 20: starting, inbuf_datalen 514 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:40 [DEBUG] conn_read_callback: socket 20 wants to read. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:40 [DEBUG] conn_write_callback: socket 20 wants to write. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:40 [DEBUG] run_connection_housekeeping: Sending keepalive to (171.25.193.9:80) [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:26 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 19: starting, inbuf_datalen 0 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:26 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 19: starting, inbuf_datalen 514 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:26 [DEBUG] conn_read_callback: socket 19 wants to read. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:26 [DEBUG] conn_write_callback: socket 19 wants to write. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:26 [DEBUG] run_connection_housekeeping: Sending keepalive to (204.13.164.118:443) [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:23 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 22: starting, inbuf_datalen 0 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:23 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 22: starting, inbuf_datalen 514 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:23 [DEBUG] conn_read_callback: socket 22 wants to read. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:22 [DEBUG] conn_write_callback: socket 22 wants to write. [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:22 [DEBUG] run_connection_housekeeping: Sending keepalive to (86.59.21.38:443) [1 duplicate hidden] x 10:46:10 [DEBUG] consdiffmgr_cleanup: Looking for consdiffmgr entries to remove qj 10:45:58 [DEBUG] connection_or_process_cells_from_inbuf: 15: starting, inbuf_datalen 0 (0 pending in tls object). [1 duplicate hidden]

3 3

Quoting spam considered harmful
by Ralph Seichter 18 Apr '19

18 Apr '19

* Seby: > This dude just won't stop harassing us with masked advertising, > commercial offers and monetary asks. [...] My mail killfile is useful for discarding mail by specific senders, but quoting their posts negates that effect, so please don't. Thanks. -Ralph

2 5

Re: [tor-relays] [tor-talk] Anyone interested in running FreeBSD or Linux Exit Relays on AS19624?
by grarpamp 17 Apr '19

17 Apr '19

On 4/17/19, Seby <seby2kt14(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Here we go again... Not really different than all the quasi or non profit tor node groups posting their news now and then. Nos onions, torservers, emerald onions, noisebridge, etc. Hey look at me, join us, give us money, we're doing stuff, etc. So long as it supports the overlay networks, gets nodes running on them, etc... some diversity in approach to that isn't going to kill you, else hit your 'block' button. Maybe even some new operators-to-be like the offer of somehow working together with a hosters to get started funding and running their nodes that they would otherwise not be so confidant to do right away as a first step. Worry about MyFamily and good ops instead. > stop OMFG yes, please stop top posting, all of you.

1 0

Anyone interested in running FreeBSD or Linux Exit Relays on AS19624?
by Conrad Rockenhaus 17 Apr '19

17 Apr '19

For a small donation in relation to the number of physical CPUs (and x cores each) plus bandwidth you want, (mbp/s or gbp/s) I can provide you your own instance on my OpenStack cloud that I just built out on AS19624. No exit policy restrictions, I handle all abuse complaints, so you won’t have to worry about any abuse takedowns. This is the only time I’ll mention it here. If anyone is interested, please email me directly. Thanks, Conrad

4 3

Making use of new bandwidth
by Logforme 11 Apr '19

11 Apr '19

I run the non-exit relay: https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/855BC2DABE24C861CD887DB9B2E9… The relay run on a debian stretch machine with an i5-4670 at 3.8GHz with 4GB memory. CPU usage at 250Mbps traffic is around 40% of 1 core out of 4. On April 1st my ISP doubled my bandwidth, from 250Mbps to 500Mbps. So far the Tor bandwidth authorities seems to not have picked up on all the new bandwidth. The observed bandwidth number has changed twice, increasing with small amounts. How long does it take for the BW authorities to eventually observe a BW closer to 500Mbps. Weeks? Months? The reason I ask is that I wonder if I should run a second Tor instance or if the current one will be able to make use a a reasonable part of the 500Mps.

5 8

Dirauth running new bandwidth scanner version
by juga 10 Apr '19

10 Apr '19

Hi!, >From this moment longclaw is using a new bandwidth scanner version [0]. If you detect any issues with longclaw's voted bandwidth, please email me or open a ticket in Tor project trac [1]. Thanks, juga. [0] sbws.rtfd.io [1] trac.torproject.org

1 0

Advertised Bandwidth/Consensus Weight Dropping: Is Verizon FiOS throttling Tor Relays?
by Neel Chauhan 10 Apr '19

10 Apr '19

Hi tor-relays@ mailing list, I run the following Tor middle relay on a 300 Mbps symmetrical Verizon FiOS connection: https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/2A65713649C1FD68764DBF43C463… My setup is as follows: * HPE MicroServer Gen10 (AMD X3421) running FreeBSD 12.0 * Tor relay in FreeBSD 12.0 jail, with "RelayBandwidthRate 0" * Linksys WRT1900AC running OpenWrt The Linksys is connected directly to Verizon's ONT (which converts fiber/GPON to Ethernet) and no Verizon-branded router is used in my setup. The problem is that after setting up my relay, I had my Tor Advertised Bandwidth and Consensus Weight values trend downwards for the past week. Sometimes, I have occasional spikes in consensus weight. This relay has a new fingerprint, but used this server with another fingerprint as well. On the previous fingerprint, I reached a peak of 19.5 MB/s (~160 Mbps) for the Advertised Bandwidth but has dropped to ~10 MB/s (~80 Mbps). The previous fingerprint also had the same server and router. I am thinking the issue is one of the two: 1. Tor bandwidth authority nodes are overloaded or have bad connectivity to Verizon 2. Verizon is intentionally throttling Tor on FiOS 3. The relay ramp-up phase is still in action for my relay and I need to wait I am suspecting reason 2, as I had seen my bandwidth values drop, and unable to reach higher values. For some reason, other relays on AS701 (Verizon's AS Number) have higher Advertised Bandwidth/Consensus Weight values than me (around ~18.7MB/s on the fastest relay): https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#search/as:AS701 Sometimes, the other FiOS relays can go up to ~23 MB/s (~184 Mbps). Is Verizon throttling Tor or are Tor bandwidth authority nodes just overloaded (or have bad peering with Verizon)? Or is it just the relay ramp-up phase in action? Thank You, Neel Chauhan

1 0

Another Slow Relay
by Ben Riley 09 Apr '19

09 Apr '19

Hi everyone, I've read over a couple of other threads regarding relays being slow, however, I can't figure out why mine is running as slow as it is. I used to have a FAST flag and was getting a throughput of several hundred KB/sec on my relay. Now I can't remember if I upgraded TOR or just updated the OS, but I lost the flag. I figured that I'd changed something and would have to 'earn' it again after a few days, week and now months? According to NYX, my average is 6.4KB/sec. I did have the limit set to 1MB and 2MB burst for the last few months thinking that would be more than enough. This morning I changed those (via NYX) to 0 (default) 1GB/s and it looks like it's starting to climb. My internet connection is on a home set up with a connection speed of about 97Mb, so plenty of speed available. If you look at my previous reports on: https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/9F19251CEE17B1E05084898D164F… there appears to be a massive drop off in speed during Feb 2019. I'm open to suggestion. Additionally, I'm considering opening an exit port, but everyone seems to say that is a REALLY bad idea on a home set up. Plus I don't really know what I'm doing :)

3 5

Please help, my relay is unresponsive
by digitalist00 08 Apr '19

08 Apr '19

Dear helpers! Nyx says that my relay is unresponsive and that it was resumed. As I write this mail I have already 334 duplicates hidden. What's my problem and how can I solve this? The relay runs on a Raspberry Pi and is connected via LAN. Yours Digitalist [Unbenannt.JPG] Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.

4 16

IPv6 not provided, guard relay
by digitalist00 08 Apr '19

08 Apr '19

Hello! I have read that it's recommended to enable IPv6 for a tor middle relay. But my provider doesn't offer IPv6. Is IPv6 required to become a guard middle relay? Yours Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.

2 2

Relay C19B33758B3A5144894233EC4C95D7985B9FD101
by ylms 08 Apr '19

08 Apr '19

Hello, I just setup a new exit, I know it takes time to "train", but I would be interested in tips on how to tweak it. I just replaces a old exit that used the same IP, but unfortunately we lost that config/key. So any tips are welcome in general. I also have some questions. Atlas does not show any IPv6 address, is this normal? WHat loglevel can I set to see if there is any problems, to find possible improvements? I know the logging should not be changed, but I want tot make sure tor works fine, so I would like to see some more information for now. Thanks for your help. yl

6 14

Re: [tor-relays] Relay C19B33758B3A5144894233EC4C95D7985B9FD101
by ylms 08 Apr '19

08 Apr '19

On 4/5/19 12:36 PM, torgate(a)linux-hus.dk wrote: > hi, the adress is in use check what is running on your system and check > also the ports sudo lsof -i -P -n | grep LISTEN does not show any ports used twice for the same address. yl

1 0

is a good idea to run a ssh honeypot?
by caioau 07 Apr '19

07 Apr '19

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi, I been running a relay for almost 1,5 year, and in the beginning I didn't change the default 22 ssh port but a lot of people were trying to login , no worries I only allow public key authentication. So I was wondering if I could record the attacks, so I find this https://haas.nic.cz/ service and I'm running on my relay, is it a good idea? Thanks Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: ProtonMail Comment: https://protonmail.com wsBcBAEBCAAGBQJcqlUBAAoJEO6drAP5JZWbZ30H/i5UlyLceKIKB1osoA16 W0x2YZWoLw8Lvifxt0ijwQSLdzU5H1CTXxHoQJLpygESdGJMbBYiOGirRnWR nnlHqnbHHwUbZDUsxUBZTBrutwVaXXmswYyfrgZvJo17ocSaT2goaPJ0F9oK JHpzDegTOIE6hbwUI3BnDLI6u7/gCE1ZvgrzSbIvXebZ8XKC67j0AwhKMX0Q zUjLpXQ2eq5XLKPlOnXUc/i6xYCIoNjoBRSHX95hd2N4zy7xuZ3UhrVn0ZBi 7ZRjo77h7BeRsB3F9bA61DfgN9pM+J+R9sPU3qYClXPB/cOJmyVqVFtcT7NK 0Tz+mfbFNI8KfhN9ZHMS16Q= =FsLz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] is a good idea to run a ssh honeypot?
by caioau 07 Apr '19

07 Apr '19

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 I use ufw as my firewall and it's set to limit ssh so if there's someone brute forcing the ssh it will get blocked for a time Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Sunday, April 7, 2019 7:54 PM, Elmar Otter <mailer(a)elmarotter.eu> wrote: > Hello, > > Why don't you use Fail2Ban? > > Greatings, Elmar > > Op 07-04-19 om 21:52 schreef caioau: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > Hi, I been running a relay for almost 1,5 year, and in the beginning I didn't change the default 22 ssh port but a lot of people were trying to login , no worries I only allow public key authentication. > > > > So I was wondering if I could record the attacks, so I find this https://haas.nic.cz/ service and I'm running on my relay, is it a good idea? > > > > Thanks > > > > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: ProtonMail > > Comment: https://protonmail.com > > > > wsBcBAEBCAAGBQJcqlUBAAoJEO6drAP5JZWbZ30H/i5UlyLceKIKB1osoA16 > > W0x2YZWoLw8Lvifxt0ijwQSLdzU5H1CTXxHoQJLpygESdGJMbBYiOGirRnWR > > nnlHqnbHHwUbZDUsxUBZTBrutwVaXXmswYyfrgZvJo17ocSaT2goaPJ0F9oK > > JHpzDegTOIE6hbwUI3BnDLI6u7/gCE1ZvgrzSbIvXebZ8XKC67j0AwhKMX0Q > > zUjLpXQ2eq5XLKPlOnXUc/i6xYCIoNjoBRSHX95hd2N4zy7xuZ3UhrVn0ZBi > > 7ZRjo77h7BeRsB3F9bA61DfgN9pM+J+R9sPU3qYClXPB/cOJmyVqVFtcT7NK > > 0Tz+mfbFNI8KfhN9ZHMS16Q= > > =FsLz > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > tor-relays mailing list > > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: ProtonMail Comment: https://protonmail.com wsBcBAEBCAAGBQJcqlaMAAoJEO6drAP5JZWbQWIH/ilOz3NVPG5J+GpiNDv5 ju59FlI0TaxdS30sR1AwPhEnROGfso0vELw9EXVgmUrZbYYK05pa95FnHEps bHQSTJhkD7bMHzMYs/5O/mWTLA3CNHBGOuJW42pC/5l8EG8/+/vxNMKpfDJD zmft+QketkX/0n0vznmrO4kwn8pKVagqcBvkIMFSA2KvYRW/ldFA2xkNk6oR NbKGUAcCCU29erzwpDPfK4XOf+Qeqmrr1QOCPtX1OYLJSYZJgArPtUrG7Wy9 gcEyHsUO4GfEbhGWMqUiRHR3nlZnzRlFaVyYAJ5h292dZU1hh/Zb11DoCRzS FJXH901okncTHTqzs9PVdx0= =itms -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

FallbackDir
by Conrad Rockenhaus 07 Apr '19

07 Apr '19

Is their a need for any more FallbackDirs? Thanks, Conrad -- Conrad Rockenhaus https://www.rockenhaus.com Cell: (254) 292-3350 Fax: (254) 875-0459

2 1

exit operators: tor-exit-notice.html file needs updating to solve 404
by nusenu 07 Apr '19

07 Apr '19

Hi, due to some recent changes on the tor project website some URLs in the default tor-exit-notice html file that many exit operators use result in 404s. To prevent 404 simply add "2019." at the beginning of the URLs. If you are using ansible-relayor this is fixed in v19.1.5 (released on 2019-04-06). and rerunning the playbook should fix it for you unless you use a custom file via 'tor_exit_notice_file'. upstream: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/30052 -- https://twitter.com/nusenu_ https://mastodon.social/@nusenu

3 5

Question about new website
by Keifer Bly 06 Apr '19

06 Apr '19

Hi all, the new website looks nice. I like the look of it. I have one question, where can the tor expert bundle be downloaded from now? Thanks. -- --Keifer

2 5

mailing list tone
by George 05 Apr '19

05 Apr '19

The mailing list is specifically for Tor relay operators and related issues. There's no space for personal attacks. Such attacks debase the main purpose of this mailing list, and set a negative tone for everyone, including those who are just watching the attacks. Additionally, condescending remarks like: >> No one else cares about you and your confused lackeys attempts to >> be big-boy tor relay operators. ...have no place here. Such remarks can discourage newcomers who are still learning, especially those who are not men. It reinforces the outdated idea that the relay operator community is a boys' club for the properly initiated. Let's respectfully help people who are still learning, and let's also be respectful about giving constructive feedback when people behave in ways we might not like. We want a mailing list environment that is conducive to both new and experienced relay operators to engage in fruitful discussions. We ask that you follow those guidelines, or leave. George for the Tor Community Council -- 34A6 0A1F F8EF B465 866F F0C5 5D92 1FD1 ECF6 1682

2 1