- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

75 Exit Relays (48 currently running) - AS 197226 SPRINT SA (PL) - No Contact/MyFamily
by nusenu 01 Feb '18

01 Feb '18

Dear anonymous relay operator, thank you for adding so many exit relays this month in AS 197226 SPRINT SA (PL) (netblocks 185.234.218.x and 77.87.79.x) we would really like to keep these relays on the network, but they do not have any contact information and MyFamily configuration set - which is required for such big relay groups. If you are the relay operator, please set a working contactInfo and proper MyFamily configuration and drop an email to bad-relays(a)lists.torproject.org. If they do not hear from you, tor directory authorities might decide remove these relays. It would be a shame to loose so much bandwidth. thanks for your understanding, nusenu +---------------------+-----------------+-------------+------------+---------+---------+------------------------------------------+ | first_seen | IP | tor_version | nickname | or_port | contact | fingerprint | +---------------------+-----------------+-------------+------------+---------+---------+------------------------------------------+ | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.37 | 0.3.2.9 | Ceto | 23774 | NULL | 171F6B9BBEC4EBF903CF312CB71CE554F46D8689 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.34 | 0.3.2.9 | Hera | 25565 | NULL | 75712D28F4744FBECAD2E67250644C7258FA71F6 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.36 | 0.3.2.9 | Brizo | 25595 | NULL | A44A3AF8B117665AEB200D0D60674177629EBD18 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.39 | 0.3.2.9 | Helios | 27365 | NULL | 625DC27C540CAE9EF37A8E8851808556AE3E4621 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.46 | 0.3.2.9 | Rhea | 32736 | NULL | 52E2BC36E8B333561C3F36689C1DF9A384B281AC | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.40 | 0.3.2.9 | Hestia | 28736 | NULL | 983221B0D3E68EF8A1D0D6A1EF2DDCF0BA73F710 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.31 | 0.3.2.9 | Aphrodite | 25535 | NULL | 7D8EFB8923173FB89EFE457BA2A6B04D7A9C3395 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.35 | 0.3.2.9 | Zeus | 25575 | NULL | F8ED98209AB9E73420530AA18BABE8AABC4E7619 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.33 | 0.3.2.9 | Hades | 25555 | NULL | 0875C580CC0F0F7E57727AC3C2233F5E6A58AE28 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.42 | 0.3.2.9 | Pallas | 30263 | NULL | D3E518F3749F9FC398261EC60B00B3B1D7535E42 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.38 | 0.3.2.9 | Chaos | 26536 | NULL | 1C49F07147A9113583190D38E58BA40DBECFB9F7 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.43 | 0.3.2.9 | Styx | 28736 | NULL | D6FC8F1E0FB2FC3AC4634FC26E4E1E4D7E1FB558 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.41 | 0.3.2.9 | Nyx | 29096 | NULL | 8B200C067525B70930C4D6CB5DE4C7320B0418AC | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.44 | 0.3.2.9 | Tyche | 29736 | NULL | F76368EC7009FB98F81544473B2F709859FB5327 | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.32 | 0.3.2.9 | Apollo | 25545 | NULL | 830227075292332360349D7A5842B1125004DC6D | | 2018-01-17 22:00:00 | 185.234.218.45 | 0.3.2.9 | Uranus | 31837 | NULL | 01F6F2FA7921681EF6CF9DD327D8E1531B249B78 | | 2018-01-17 23:00:00 | 77.87.79.46 | 0.3.2.9 | Artemis | 29384 | NULL | 65B2D3A0E002704B32B751C4238983D83297E5FB | | 2018-01-17 23:00:00 | 185.234.218.49 | 0.3.2.9 | Maia | 32736 | NULL | ECC5026169EDC6012244B06C2C8C9E90A4574077 | | 2018-01-17 23:00:00 | 77.87.79.49 | 0.3.2.9 | Astra | 29374 | NULL | B4FEC3BD7FF7D269490A5DDCD5B96799BC46489A | | 2018-01-17 23:00:00 | 185.234.218.50 | 0.3.2.9 | Heracles | 31945 | NULL | 94D951D305DEFBBF2552BBDD9C919B09633DDA24 | | 2018-01-17 23:00:00 | 77.87.79.47 | 0.3.2.9 | Hypnos | 25363 | NULL | 537DD2E2D2F026FA9CD210E4B854584762DD9DB6 | | 2018-01-17 23:00:00 | 185.234.218.48 | 0.3.2.9 | Proteus | 28373 | NULL | 7F6DF29D2E0A82834E45AC210990B855802752B6 | | 2018-01-17 23:00:00 | 185.234.218.47 | 0.3.2.9 | Peitha | 28342 | NULL | 6716D11B3D43EA12EC883AA45A600EA277946A39 | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.59 | 0.3.2.9 | Charon | 32734 | NULL | 7868248CD8FEE709AEAC0D13F1E30F79EC02D4C4 | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.60 | 0.3.2.9 | Nemesis | 27364 | NULL | 54DC9A823CDFAB833590B4E4AE7EC386F38E2EB2 | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.56 | 0.3.2.9 | Sirens | 35736 | NULL | AA545B49FE9AE5FC4B2295330E77EAD7BA228AEC | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.52 | 0.3.2.9 | Erotes | 28374 | NULL | 36876E90176DBE3395A3EE8A2584FE7C3513C3C6 | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.57 | 0.3.2.9 | Eleus | 28374 | NULL | F47044B9A265994F17EE02FBDA2046DB1A48E6F6 | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.55 | 0.3.2.9 | Doris | 33625 | NULL | 9D30457253C5F43AAF38D6356C2B1E8CE4D4672D | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.53 | 0.3.2.9 | Astra | 34948 | NULL | C486FA81814E1EA9E6B4585205816B6CBF96445F | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.54 | 0.3.2.9 | Selene | 34837 | NULL | 6B8FDB5B3CFBB68DCC553922268EF0587BAB44B0 | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.64 | 0.3.2.9 | Cybele | 39475 | NULL | CEB93C2E3D2876FF62BA0DC2F21808346E36270A | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.51 | 0.3.2.9 | Elysium | 26374 | NULL | 34D18949F03875F6B1FCC4F6418CE10137BA7942 | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.61 | 0.3.2.9 | Adriane | 39374 | NULL | BD37B322CE0EF1ACA6B7FDD0D66F54504C053BF5 | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.58 | 0.3.2.9 | Theia | 37845 | NULL | 594252BFEE13625AC120F50F3015CB3C1DA55690 | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.62 | 0.3.2.9 | Ino | 27364 | NULL | 02B2B98F879CFC70313BB20C4A88AE150E121DFD | | 2018-01-18 00:00:00 | 77.87.79.63 | 0.3.2.9 | Cotys | 34273 | NULL | 10E609E88024C1DB1E8D701602F254C0E8A7576E | | 2018-01-18 01:00:00 | 77.87.79.65 | 0.3.2.9 | Acheron | 35334 | NULL | 94FA1F71A8192C4337F734EC911FBA846045AB54 | | 2018-01-18 01:00:00 | 77.87.79.68 | 0.3.2.9 | Ourea | 27364 | NULL | A75AAE0B7C4A394F3E67DE31E2185EF37F439A5B | | 2018-01-18 01:00:00 | 77.87.79.70 | 0.3.2.9 | Cronus | 34567 | NULL | CAD689550FF6D332698E3687CD0DC40B2475CB38 | | 2018-01-18 01:00:00 | 77.87.79.67 | 0.3.2.9 | Dione | 35334 | NULL | E7C04B1DDE6DFA350A275E88D8612A5380020667 | | 2018-01-18 01:00:00 | 77.87.79.66 | 0.3.2.9 | Atlas | 36543 | NULL | CA318FEF4A3274CBF89416FD580C8B64D6A7589F | | 2018-01-18 01:00:00 | 77.87.79.48 | 0.3.2.9 | Nike | 28376 | NULL | A201E6FAC690713EB25AAE42A18D4C7E277C3B73 | | 2018-01-18 01:00:00 | 77.87.79.69 | 0.3.2.9 | Themis | 29374 | NULL | DCE904F85AC6E399455E9E41584B582CC71B65E8 | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.225 | 0.3.2.9 | Gala | 9001 | NULL | D568DDFC9EB8990DB407ADB727DE07A51D835084 | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.229 | 0.3.2.9 | Pluto | 9001 | NULL | 4A8B675A0B3C1D6454DBE7A2BD25BF039F596C8F | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.222 | 0.3.2.9 | Chronos | 9001 | NULL | 5C6CA8731F14EFEFEF809533847FD560FB7A9CDA | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.231 | 0.3.2.9 | Asclepius | 9001 | NULL | BBEE2C18269C474539F30016CE427FA5C8D6EB81 | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.237 | 0.3.2.9 | Falacer | 9001 | NULL | 0267D63ECED91B436E697A6A09EEBC10EF1834B4 | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.226 | 0.3.2.9 | Hephaestus | 9001 | NULL | 9BEBB4DA55DC8C29289FC8929D32B5AC36FEB3E1 | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.224 | 0.3.2.9 | Eros | 9001 | NULL | B95EE27634948F7AB399A1E6E43595A9C07B8A75 | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.221 | 0.3.2.9 | Asclepius | 9001 | NULL | A7B317D3E45882524B071FF26D02ED5CA3896A94 | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.227 | 0.3.2.9 | Rea | 9001 | NULL | 93EA7712DADE2D903A63241C028CDC61828B6474 | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.230 | 0.3.2.9 | Caelus | 9001 | NULL | 63829EB51C9E731A1B842CBB887B30F28141C636 | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.232 | 0.3.2.9 | Diana | 9001 | NULL | 49D2098FFC4E19F387E6180EEAD8F59EF3F49E3C | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.235 | 0.3.2.9 | Ops | 9001 | NULL | D6EA61F4D08F60278AAFC867EEF7BFFD62693689 | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.234 | 0.3.2.9 | Mercury | 9001 | NULL | 407C9F6C0765C30734798999B3F61F9DA44BAACF | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.238 | 0.3.2.9 | Fiora | 9001 | NULL | D9BF6019077878703EF6534B23D2136598E4D09E | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.223 | 0.3.2.9 | Dionysus | 9001 | NULL | 3AEEC2D6F168CC59F46F62531BDF234F5066C30D | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.228 | 0.3.2.9 | Somnus | 9001 | NULL | AE8F5B743EA1D772FD1017CF3DE070FE0CB0A702 | | 2018-01-26 01:00:00 | 185.234.218.236 | 0.3.2.9 | Vesta | 9001 | NULL | FC9AE0DD0B4A03ACA845A534A29B1442B2CB1654 | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.248 | 0.3.2.9 | Pales | 9001 | NULL | 7779110F487C0F1C399321848D7879F16CFB7933 | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.250 | 0.3.2.9 | Fides | 9001 | NULL | F92479656F51E2C0C29935F75AFE94921D77E8D5 | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.242 | 0.3.2.9 | Diana | 9001 | NULL | 742C08BD99FC849BF641331C8A0E5B198CA058D0 | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.244 | 0.3.2.9 | Sol | 9001 | NULL | 80F620ABA515A928CBE2D043B4253536F022EF16 | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.249 | 0.3.2.9 | Vediovis | 9001 | NULL | FDDF7F36DDD254FDEAE5127F595C5DA0A571034A | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.246 | 0.3.2.9 | Larunda | 9001 | NULL | 17E0D5E328FD6A06D3BD1A1CCB190682D038A7AA | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.241 | 0.3.2.9 | Lucina | 9001 | NULL | 3EEA0DD81D8C4CE243E991538E47CA32EFF5CCC4 | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.239 | 0.3.2.9 | Vulcan | 9001 | NULL | 8726F9C47A3703A1F0D79626CDCB0CF0DEB0FDBC | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.240 | 0.3.2.9 | Lares | 9001 | NULL | 084AC15FD4FC3F1229A994D8E8F8ABE8FDD77E97 | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.247 | 0.3.2.9 | Feronia | 9001 | NULL | 83F72AB24DE1EC398FF5828C9DB19A6357E573DC | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.243 | 0.3.2.9 | Fons | 9001 | NULL | 5B06421F56248CED92212987F72D27BB4F0BB3C2 | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.233 | 0.3.2.9 | Mars | 9001 | NULL | 25E7317FC422673C537221860B16DD1B3283B88C | | 2018-01-26 02:00:00 | 185.234.218.245 | 0.3.2.9 | Luna | 9001 | NULL | F4DA978E63B181C60C4FC206E9274D46810489ED | | 2018-01-30 23:00:00 | 185.234.218.33 | 0.3.2.9 | Hades | 25555 | NULL | A7F34E65DD14F72E237760216CCB65A99EB9BE59 | +---------------------+-----------------+-------------+------------+---------+---------+------------------------------------------+ -- https://mastodon.social/@nusenu twitter: @nusenu_

3 5

High number of simultaneous connections from a single host
by zless 01 Feb '18

01 Feb '18

Hello everyone, I was inspecting my node and just saw that it has a very high number of connections. It jumped from the normal 6000-7000 to more than 17000 simultaneous connections. Looking at the connections with `ss` I see some hosts with over 1000 connections while the majority is usually bellow 10. Here are some stats with the IP and the associated number of simultaneous connections: 212.32.226.237 : 1531 207.244.110.200 : 1520 162.210.192.70 : 1471 207.244.70.120 : 1455 198.7.59.194 : 1454 212.32.239.28 : 1450 5.79.103.239 : 1414 5.79.103.238 : 1401 51.15.162.120 : 1379 37.48.104.231 : 56 5.79.72.66 : 26 37.48.105.240 : 25 212.83.3.154 : 25 78.46.99.242 : 23 178.63.47.145 : 18 46.4.84.142 : 17 213.133.100.55 : 17 46.4.106.87 : 15 144.76.18.214 : 14 Is it normal for a single host to produce so many connections? How do you people handle such situations? Thanks

5 5

What's the priority right now?
by Conrad Rockenhaus 01 Feb '18

01 Feb '18

I’m ready to get node #3 up right now…so what’s the priority for high speed nodes right now, exits or relays? Just wanted to know before I brought it online. This one is based in the great land of Canada :D. Thanks, Conrad

3 2

0.3.2.9 not reporting bandwidth in atlas
by Paul Templeton 31 Jan '18

31 Jan '18

Is it me or is there some issue. Since I've upgraded to version 0.3.2.9 there has been no update to the bandwidth graphs. family:867B95CACD64653FEEC4D2CEFC5C49B4620307A7 Paul 609662E824251C283164243846C035C803940378

3 2

MyFamily and ContactInfo fields are required for operators running multiple tor instances
by nusenu 31 Jan '18

31 Jan '18

Hi, I'd like to highlight that today the following two sentences requiring ContactInfo and MyFamily for operators running multiple relays got added to the tor manual page [1]: > ContactInfo **must** be set to a working address if you run more than one > relay or bridge. (Really, everybody running a relay or bridge should set > it.) > > > MyFamily **must** be set correctly if you run more than one relay or > bridge. (That is, every relay should list all the others as described > above.) The main motivation for this change have been suspicious tor relays that bad-relays@ ML decided to remove but had no way direct way to contact and so was forced to make hard decisions. With these clear statements bad-relays@ ML group can handle problematic cases better. regards, nusenu [1] https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/tree/doc/tor.1.txt#n1717 -- https://mastodon.social/@nusenu twitter: @nusenu_

6 8

Tor uses up all available memory and eventually quits
by georgemaschke＠posteo.de 31 Jan '18

31 Jan '18

I am running a Tor (0.2.5.16 on Debian Linux) relay on a VPS with one gigabyte of RAM and no swap partition or swap file. The hosting company states that it doesn't support swap in order to prolong the life of its solid state drives. Tor gradually uses up more and more memory until its percentage usage is in the high 90s. Then Tor quits. This happens within about 48 hours of launch. What can I do to resolve this problem? Thanks! George W. Maschke https://georgemaschke.net

6 7

#2667 [Core Tor/Tor]: Exits should block reentry into the tor network
by nusenu 31 Jan '18

31 Jan '18

> Comment (by arma): > > I continue to think that teaching exit relays to avoid allowing exit > connections to known relays (IP:ORPort) is a good and useful step. > > We keep running across messy situations where letting somebody connect to > a relay from an exit relay's IP address turns into a security surprise. Does that mean that exits will no longer be able to run tor clients (ie. to run apt updates via tor)? -- https://mastodon.social/@nusenu twitter: @nusenu_

2 2

Attack or issue? 4 / 11 M of traffic
by Stijn Jonker 30 Jan '18

30 Jan '18

Hi All, Since around midnight CET, my relay who was happily running almost the same amount of traffic in and outbound, has dropped to 4 Meg in, 11 Meg out according to SNMP on the host. (Cap: 10M/peak 12.5M). Lots of messages like: - Channel padding timeout scheduled 304317ms in the past. - Your computer is too slow to handle this many circuit creation requests! Please consider using the MaxAdvertisedBandwidth config option or choosing a more restricted exit policy. [45685 similar message(s) suppressed in last 60 seconds] Any suggestions what to check / verify for this? 328E54981C6DDD7D89B89E418724A4A7881E3192 Thx, Stijn

2 1

How to post to this list
by grarpamp 30 Jan '18

30 Jan '18

1) DO NOT Top Post, backwards it's because that's, reply below what you're replying to. 2) DO NOT Bulk Quote, trim what you're replying to down to the minimum size needed to convey the relavant context. 3) DO NOT Block Reply, piecewise interleave your replies below each piece of context to which you are replying. 4) DO NOT send HTML, set you rmailer to compose and send plain text emails. Far too many breaking basic "email netiquette" lately. Learn more by searching that quote.

4 5

tor on arm vps
by Quintin 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

I see online.net has a lot of ARM VPSes. Does tor run fine on these? Q -- 0101100101000001010010000101011101000101010010000010000001000010 0100110001000101010100110101001100100000010110010100111101010101

3 11

A lot of Warn messages when bootstrapping Tor 0.3.2.9 (stable)
by Dark Matter 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

Hello, I'm running a tor-relay with Tor version 0.3.2.9 (stable). I had to do some daemon restarts, because of connection limit issues. Since the last two restarts the Tor process issues a lot of warnings while bootstrapping, because it could not create a (client) circuit. Relay functionality is working without problems. Before these restarts I had no problems connecting to the tor network and creating circuits. Tor usually booted within less than a minute without warnings. I found a ticket describing the same problem (although for a different Tor version) here: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/24639. Are there any known workarounds yet? For more detail, I'll post the last warning messages: Jan 25 18:31:54.000 [warn] Problem bootstrapping. Stuck at 90%: Establishing a Tor circuit. (Connection timed out; TIMEOUT; count 1503; recommendation warn; host B7047FBDE9C53C39011CA84E5CB2A8E3543066D0 at 199.249.223.60:443) Jan 25 18:31:54.000 [warn] 1503 connections have failed: Jan 25 18:31:54.000 [warn] 1026 connections died in state connect()ing with SSL state (No SSL object) Jan 25 18:31:54.000 [warn] 392 connections died in state handshaking (TLS) with SSL state SSLv2/v3 read server hello A in HANDSHAKE Jan 25 18:31:54.000 [warn] 84 connections died in state handshaking (Tor, v3 handshake) with SSL state SSL negotiation finished successfully in OPEN Jan 25 18:31:54.000 [warn] 1 connections died in state handshaking (TLS) with SSL state unknown state in HANDSHAKE Tor had to try to open a circuit for more than half an hour before finally succeeding... Regards, Dark

3 2

The Onion Box: Connections
by Ralph Wetzel 28 Jan '18

28 Jan '18

3 2

Upgraded relay non show in ATLAS
by MLTor Node 27 Jan '18

27 Jan '18

6 11

>30% of the Tor network runs outdated version: Consider enabling auto-updates
by nusenu 27 Jan '18

27 Jan '18

Hi, when writing the content for the Tor Relay Guide we also collected steps to enable auto updates for various Linux distributions. The motivation for this is that there are a lot of relays (>3000) running outdated tor releases. If more operators enable auto-updates the number of outdated tor relays hopefully decreases. https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/TorRelayGuide#AutomaticSoftwa… Debian: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/TorRelayGuide/DebianUbuntuUpd… RPM Distros: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/TorRelayGuide/RPMUpdates thanks, nusenu -- https://mastodon.social/@nusenu twitter: @nusenu_

7 11

debugging unbound on 'torexit' failing DNS queries
by nusenu 26 Jan '18

26 Jan '18

<tor-admin(a)portaltodark.world> wrote: > Resent under the correct alias. > > I'm having high amounts of failures on this VPS (PulseServers). I run a > local unbound instance, and see an incredible amount of: > Jan 17 19:27:33 torexit unbound: [559:0] notice: sendto failed: Operation > not permitted > Jan 17 19:27:33 torexit unbound: [559:0] notice: remote address is > 198.97.190.53 port 53 > Jan 17 19:27:33 torexit unbound: [559:0] notice: sendto failed: Operation > not permitted > Jan 17 19:27:33 torexit unbound: [559:0] notice: remote address is > 192.42.93.30 port 53 > Jan 17 19:27:33 torexit unbound: [559:0] notice: sendto failed: Operation > not permitted > Jan 17 19:27:33 torexit unbound: [559:0] notice: remote address is > 192.35.51.30 port 53 > Jan 17 19:27:33 torexit unbound: [559:0] notice: sendto failed: Operation > not permitted > > To give proportion to "incredible amount", > Jan 17 19:21:32 torexit rsyslogd: imjournal: 9897 messages lost due to > rate-limiting > Jan 17 19:22:02 torexit journal: Suppressed 1216 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:22:32 torexit journal: Suppressed 1209 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:23:02 torexit journal: Suppressed 1827 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:23:32 torexit journal: Suppressed 2333 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:24:02 torexit journal: Suppressed 3029 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:24:32 torexit journal: Suppressed 2822 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:25:02 torexit journal: Suppressed 2715 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:25:32 torexit journal: Suppressed 3166 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:26:02 torexit journal: Suppressed 4093 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:26:32 torexit journal: Suppressed 45878 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:27:02 torexit journal: Suppressed 30125 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:27:32 torexit journal: Suppressed 31764 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > Jan 17 19:28:02 torexit journal: Suppressed 31229 messages from > /system.slice/unbound.service > > Could it be limits from the VPS provider on the amount of outbound udp/53 > connections? To me this looks more like a local problem? Are you doing any packet filtering on the host (outbound)? Does DNS work on that host if you try manual queries? From the IPs in your logs I assume your unbound is configured to query recursively itself (no upstream forwarding) that is good, can you confirm that and provide your unbound config + iptalbes -vnL? -- https://mastodon.social/@nusenu twitter: @nusenu_

4 13

Re: [tor-relays] A lot of Warn messages when bootstrapping
by Dark Matter 26 Jan '18

26 Jan '18

Thanks for the fast reply! > Your relay has probably chosen some overloaded guards. > The problem comes from the extra load on those machines, not your relay. > Your relay will eventually try other guards. > > Are you sure it's not overloaded? > It might be worth checking the logs, inbound connections, RAM, and CPU > after it has been running for a few days. Yes, the relay is working fine - the only problem was the connection limit due to some OS-level limits.which is why I had to restart the relay in the first place. > Ignore the warning messages unless your relay is having problems. Ok, I'll do :) Once one successful circuit was established, there were no warnings any more. It just took some time - but I cannot tell if the relay switched guards or if the guard nodes finally managed to accept a connection request, since I didn't check the guard node set prior to restarting. Regards, Dark

1 0

No graph update for my relay in ATLAS
by Peter Ott 26 Jan '18

26 Jan '18

Hi, it seems that the graph in ATLAS (1 month and 3 months) for my relay isn't updated any longer for the graph 'read.' and 'written bytes per second' (last info was of 2018-01-01). The graph for 'consensus weight', 'middle probability' etc. seems to be ok. During startup of TOR (running it on Windows 10 / x64) the DirPort and the ORPort is reachable. Any idea? Btw how long must the relay be 'up' to get the 'stable' or 'guard' flag granted. My relay is now online for 46 days -only restarted for a TOR release upgrade-. A change of the IP-adress seems to be handled fine by TOR. This change by the ISP occurs at least every 3 days or so). Thanks in advance and best regards Peter Relay TRUMPER FP: 12DFC9D1852979939D9317F57A857C80BC73165E

4 6

Advertised Bandwidth
by MarkIt8Dude 25 Jan '18

25 Jan '18

Hi all, I’d like to understand something about Advertised Bandwidth. I set up my Tor Relay 3 months ago. With the following settings : RelayBandwidthRate 1250 KBytes RelayBandwidthBurst 1450 KBytes But i only get and Advertised Bandwidth of 83.79 KiB/s. Very far from my settings. And also it makes me think that my relay is completely useless …☹ Any suggestions ? Thx,

3 2

Upgraded relay non show in ATLAS
by MLTor Node 25 Jan '18

25 Jan '18

Hi to all! i have a little relay running in my home LAN on Windows 2016 server (MLTorNode, FE4033D750831C32A957174ADD11E40F558A14A9). A few days ago, i create two VLan on my home network, one dedicated for my Tor relay. Today i updated service to 3.2.9 release. After starting tor service, log say that Orport and DIRport are reachable from outside, so it seems to be working without problems. But if i query Atlas, my node seems to be down from 5 days. The IP showed in Atlas is old (i have dynamic IP and dynamic DNS). I stop and start several times service with no luck. Anyone can help me? My node is small, but i like very much Tor and i want to continue contributing to the project. -- Marlenio (MLTorNode) FE4033D750831C32A957174ADD11E40F558A14A9

2 3

Middle relays stopping because of "SYN flood"?
by Christian Krbusek 25 Jan '18

25 Jan '18

Dear list, recently I´m facing issues with my 4 middle relays: B1E889E8EA604D81326F5071E0ABF1B2B16D5DAB FC9AC8EA0160D88BCCFDE066940D7DD9FA45495B BDB9EBCB1C2A424973A240C91EEC082C3EB61626 ACD889D86E02EDDAB1AFD81F598C0936238DC6D0 All of them running v0.3.2.9 on Debian stretch (kvm, 2 cores, 2GB RAM) and stopping with the log entries below. I can´t remember when this started but I´m quite sure it did not happen a few month ago. There have not been any recent changes on the hardwarenode or on the VMs. All of them running the "same" configuration created by ansible-relayor - one example below. The VMs are running at the time the relays go offline and even a network restart doesn´t fix the issue so I have to restart the VM to get the relays up and running again. Any hints would be much appreciated, if any more infos are needed just ask. Cheers, Christian >>>>> CONFIG START <<<<< # ansible-relayor generated torrc configuration file # Note: manual changes will be OVERWRITTEN on the next ansible-playbook run OfflineMasterKey 1 RunAsDaemon 0 Log notice syslog OutboundBindAddress 188.118.198.244 SocksPort 0 User _tor-188.118.198.244_443 DataDirectory /var/lib/tor-instances/188.118.198.244_443 ORPort 188.118.198.244:443 DirPort 188.118.198.244:80 SyslogIdentityTag 188.118.198.244_443 ControlSocket /var/lib/tor-instances/188.118.198.244_443/controlsocket Nickname ph3x Sandbox 1 ExitRelay 0 ExitPolicy reject *:* ContactInfo 4096R/0x73538126032AD297 Christian Krbusek <abuse AT ph3x DOT at> - 1NtneNxb8awwH8woJ7oL7UVj1SJDpAn8Kc RelayBandwidthRate 15 MB RelayBandwidthBurst 30 MB NumCPUs 2 MyFamily acd889d86e02eddab1afd81f598c0936238dc6d0,b1e889e8ea604d81326f5071e0abf1b2b16d5dab,bdb9ebcb1c2a424973a240c91eec082c3eb61626,fc9ac8ea0160d88bccfde066940d7dd9fa45495b # end of torrc >>>>> CONFIG END <<<<< >>>>> LOGS START <<<<< at-vie01a-tor01.ph3x.at: Jan 25 17:58:24 at-vie01a-tor01 Tor-86.59.119.83_443[540]: Since startup, we have initiated 0 v1 connections, 0 v2 connections, 0 v3 connections, and 8629 v4 connections; and receiv ed 60 v1 connections, 4568 v2 connections, 9249 v3 connections, and 403685 v4 connections. Jan 25 18:00:17 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64938.876706] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:06 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64987.773119] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:06 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64987.774838] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:06 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64987.786154] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:06 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64987.786189] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:06 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64987.786235] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:06 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64987.786250] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:06 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64987.786315] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:06 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64987.786333] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:06 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64987.786391] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:06 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64987.786411] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:15 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64997.053055] net_ratelimit: 2 callbacks suppressed Jan 25 18:01:15 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64997.053056] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:16 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64998.301030] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:16 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64998.365099] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:17 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64998.557033] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:18 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [64999.805082] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:27 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65009.277179] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:28 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65009.533307] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:28 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65009.533678] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:28 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65009.533697] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:28 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65009.533820] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:28 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65009.534615] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:28 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65009.535200] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:28 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65009.535460] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:28 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65009.535708] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:28 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65009.536685] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:34 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65015.677629] net_ratelimit: 11 callbacks suppressed Jan 25 18:01:34 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65015.677661] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:34 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65015.677910] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:34 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65015.677989] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:34 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65015.680478] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:34 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65015.680857] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:34 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65015.682767] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:34 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65015.682832] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:34 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65015.682953] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:34 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65015.683033] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:01:34 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65015.683041] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:02:13 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65054.590190] net_ratelimit: 6 callbacks suppressed Jan 25 18:02:13 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65054.590194] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:02:13 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65054.597927] TCP: too many orphaned sockets Jan 25 18:05:15 at-vie01a-tor01 kernel: [65237.086196] TCP: request_sock_TCP: Possible SYN flooding on port 443. Sending cookies. Check SNMP counters. Jan 25 18:17:01 at-vie01a-tor01 CRON[24416]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 25 18:57:09 at-vie01a-tor01 systemd[1]: Stopped target Timers. at-vie01a-tor02.ph3x.at: Jan 25 10:17:01 at-vie01a-tor02 CRON[19123]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 25 11:17:01 at-vie01a-tor02 CRON[23992]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 25 11:59:10 at-vie01a-tor02 Tor-86.59.119.88_443[509]: Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 11:59 hours, with 38342 circuits open. I've sent 218.94 GB and received 192.87 GB. Jan 25 11:59:10 at-vie01a-tor02 Tor-86.59.119.88_443[509]: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 88566/90206 TAP, 12299213/12353484 NTor. Jan 25 11:59:10 at-vie01a-tor02 Tor-86.59.119.88_443[509]: Since startup, we have initiated 0 v1 connections, 0 v2 connections, 0 v3 connections, and 6295 v4 connections; and receiv ed 60 v1 connections, 3085 v2 connections, 6040 v3 connections, and 300693 v4 connections. Jan 25 12:17:01 at-vie01a-tor02 CRON[28856]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 25 12:18:28 at-vie01a-tor02 kernel: [44384.957658] TCP: request_sock_TCP: Possible SYN flooding on port 443. Sending cookies. Check SNMP counters. Jan 25 13:17:01 at-vie01a-tor02 CRON[28998]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 25 14:17:01 at-vie01a-tor02 CRON[29061]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 25 14:36:57 at-vie01a-tor02 ntpd[490]: Soliciting pool server 185.144.161.170 Jan 25 14:37:05 at-vie01a-tor02 ntpd[490]: Soliciting pool server 2a02:1748:0:1500:3::2005 Jan 25 14:37:16 at-vie01a-tor02 ntpd[490]: error resolving pool 1.debian.pool.ntp.org: Temporary failure in name resolution (-3) Jan 25 14:37:36 at-vie01a-tor02 ntpd[490]: error resolving pool 0.debian.pool.ntp.org: Temporary failure in name resolution (-3) at-vie01a-tor03.ph3x.at: Jan 24 13:21:18 at-vie01a-tor03 systemd[1]: apt-daily.timer: Adding 9h 35min 45.841113s random time. Jan 24 13:24:24 at-vie01a-tor03 kernel: [62694.054136] TCP: request_sock_TCP: Possible SYN flooding on port 443. Sending cookies. Check SNMP counters. Jan 24 13:59:57 at-vie01a-tor03 Tor-78.142.140.242_443[517]: Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 17:59 hours, with 0 circuits open. I've sent 314.59 GB and received 317.28 GB. Jan 24 13:59:57 at-vie01a-tor03 Tor-78.142.140.242_443[517]: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 35924/36525 TAP, 10006455/10027375 NTor. Jan 24 13:59:57 at-vie01a-tor03 Tor-78.142.140.242_443[517]: Since startup, we have initiated 0 v1 connections, 0 v2 connections, 0 v3 connections, and 11906 v4 connections; and received 47 v1 connections, 4092 v2 connections, 8578 v3 connections, and 409960 v4 connections. Jan 24 14:17:01 at-vie01a-tor03 CRON[21604]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 24 15:17:01 at-vie01a-tor03 CRON[21670]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 24 15:41:25 at-vie01a-tor03 ntpd[492]: error resolving pool 1.debian.pool.ntp.org: Temporary failure in name resolution (-3) at-vie01a-tor04.ph3x.at: Jan 25 12:00:52 at-vie01a-tor04 Tor-188.118.198.244_443[510]: Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 11:59 hours, with 36596 circuits open. I've sent 192.29 GB and received 194.32 GB. Jan 25 12:00:52 at-vie01a-tor04 Tor-188.118.198.244_443[510]: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 84713/86100 TAP, 11892935/11941101 NTor. Jan 25 12:00:52 at-vie01a-tor04 Tor-188.118.198.244_443[510]: Since startup, we have initiated 0 v1 connections, 0 v2 connections, 0 v3 connections, and 5938 v4 connections; and rec eived 44 v1 connections, 2949 v2 connections, 5395 v3 connections, and 287856 v4 connections. Jan 25 12:17:01 at-vie01a-tor04 CRON[29820]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 25 12:29:17 at-vie01a-tor04 kernel: [44936.694001] hrtimer: interrupt took 12598111 ns Jan 25 13:17:01 at-vie01a-tor04 CRON[2275]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 25 14:17:01 at-vie01a-tor04 CRON[7180]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 25 14:27:14 at-vie01a-tor04 kernel: [52013.316026] TCP: request_sock_TCP: Possible SYN flooding on port 443. Sending cookies. Check SNMP counters. Jan 25 15:17:01 at-vie01a-tor04 CRON[7920]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 25 16:17:01 at-vie01a-tor04 CRON[8023]: (root) CMD ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.hourly) Jan 25 16:42:38 at-vie01a-tor04 ntpd[492]: Soliciting pool server 81.16.38.161 Jan 25 16:42:46 at-vie01a-tor04 ntpd[492]: error resolving pool 3.debian.pool.ntp.org: Temporary failure in name resolution (-3) >>>>> LOGS END <<<<<

3 4

Tor 0.3.0.x end-of-life date in one week (2018-02-01)
by nusenu 25 Jan '18

25 Jan '18

This is a quick reminder that in one week, Tor 0.3.0.x will reach its end of life date (2018-02-01). >300 relays are still running that major version. https://nusenu.github.io/OrNetStats/#major-versions list of affected relays: https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/version:0.3.0.%20running:true https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam/CoreTor… Consider enabling auto-updates to keep your relays safe https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/TorRelayGuide#AutomaticSoftwa… -- https://mastodon.social/@nusenu twitter: @nusenu_

1 0

nyx no connections shown
by TorGate 23 Jan '18

23 Jan '18

Hi, i have 2 new relais running and have also installed nyx. When i go to the page 2 in nyx is there no connection. But my network show me over 4000 tor connections . What is the issue with nyx on my torservers ? TorGate torgate(at)linux-hus.dk

5 16

kelihos infection
by scar 22 Jan '18

22 Jan '18

Hello fellow relay operators, I have received word from my ISP that they detected malicious traffic from my account. I'm running the exit node "cave" with reduced exit policy, https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/3875c9c843d33762fa733bcaf128f26a10bc7… The information received from my ISP was: infection => 'kelihos', subtype => 'kelihos.e', port => '52935', asn => '209', family => 'kelihos', sourceSummary => 'Drone Report' Typically they will also provide an IP address related to the infection, which is usually a sinkhole. The solution is to block the IP in my exit policy. However no IP was provided in this report and there is not one available, since my ISP is just relaying information they receive from a 3rd party detection agency. Furthermore, the port mentioned, 52935, is not allowed in my exit policy, so I'm guessing that port is somewhere else... Any ideas about this "infection" and how we could prevent it from using our exit nodes? Thanks

2 1

Become a Fallback Directory Mirror
by teor 22 Jan '18

22 Jan '18

Dear Relay Operators, Do you want your relay to be a Tor fallback directory mirror? Will it have the same address and port for the next 2 years? Just reply to this email with your relay's fingerprint. If your relay is on the current list, you don't need to do anything. If you're asking: Q: What's a fallback directory mirror? Fallback directory mirrors help Tor clients connect to the network. For more details, see [1]. Q: Is my relay on the current list? Search [2] and [3] for your relay fingerprint or IP address and port. [2] is the current list of fallbacks in Tor. [3] is used to create the next list of fallbacks. Q: What do I need to do if my relay is on the list? Keep the same IP address, keys, and ports. Email tor-relays if the relay's details change. Q: Can my relay be on the list next time? We need fast relays that will be on the same IP address and port for 2 years. Reply to this email to get on the list, or to update the details of your relay. Once or twice a year, we run a script to choose about 150-200 relays from the potential list [3] for the list in Tor [2]. Q: Why didn't my relay get on the list last time? We check a relay's uptime, flags, and speed [4]. Sometimes, a relay might be down when we check. That's ok, we will check it again next time. It's good to have some new relays on the list every release. That helps tor clients, because blocking a changing list is harder. Q: What about the current relay DDoS? We don't think the DDoS will have much impact on the fallback list. If your relay is affected, please: * make sure it has enough available file descriptors, and * set MaxMemInQueues to the amount of RAM you have available per tor instance (or maybe a few hundred MB less). We're also working on some code changes. See [5] for more details. [1]: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/FallbackDirectoryMirrors [2]: https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/tree/src/or/fallback_dirs.inc [3]: https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/tree/scripts/maint/fallback.whitelist [4]: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/21564/fallbacks_… [5]: https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2017-December/013881.html -- Tim / teor PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n ------------------------------------------------------------------------

15 26

connlimit: better to use "DROP" or "REJECT --reject-with tcp-reset"?
by tor 22 Jan '18

22 Jan '18

For relay operators using iptables connlimit to mitigate DoS attacks (or increased load from new clients), is it better for the Tor network to use "DROP" rules, or should we use something like "REJECT --reject-with tcp-reset"?

4 11