- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Any IP allocations available out there?
by Paul Templeton 24 Aug '17

24 Aug '17

Thanx to all here on the list for input to earlier posts. Helped a lot. Question I have is there anywhere where you can get a block of IP address or lease as I'm in the process of getting a 10/10Mb SHDSL service(No flaming data cap :-)) here in AU but I want an IP range that abuse questions can be forwarded to me. The service provider doesn't provide ARIN registration but said if I have my own block I can update the BG and manage it my self. Regards, Paul PS - the best price I can do at the moment is $550pm - *SIGH* - but worth it.

4 4

Re: [tor-relays] Any IP allocations available out there?
by Paul Templeton 24 Aug '17

24 Aug '17

OVH has this in AU 5.9 For security reasons, OVH reserves the right to proceed with the immediate suspension without notice, of any Server on which there is a public service Proxy, IRC, VPN or TOR which is available free of charge or for a fee, and for which OVH has knowledge of its fraudulent or illegal misuse. > with Tor's overall architecture, does it really make sense to > route e.g. EU clients exiting to EU destinations, True - Wanted to add to the diversity in location and OS. Will look at other jurisdictions for better service... Still looking but so far all have data caps. I really want a decent exit node here in AU but getting perplexed. I'll sleep on it... Paul

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] Any IP allocations available out there?
by Paul Templeton 24 Aug '17

24 Aug '17

Thanx niftybunny, It's more political than anything. With the constant changes in policy driving censorship I feel that having a strong presence is important. At the moment there are 50 nodes in Australia with the fastest running at 357Kbs and only two exit nodes - fastest is 100Kbs. Its a reflection on the state of politics and the level of service that is provided by ISP's. Yes I could run more nodes in VMs around the world but at this stage I would like to investigate a strong presence here in AU. Regards, Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "niftybunny" <abuse(a)to-surf-and-protect.net> To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 10:41:12 AM Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Any IP allocations available out there? The smallest block you can advertise with your own AD is a /24 as far as I know. Getting a IPv4 /24 is …. expensive and hard to get. If you are not incredible rich and very tech savvy and a hardcore Tor supporter: Forget it. Get yourself a few virtual servers. niftybunny “For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'” --David Cameron, 2015 On 24. Aug 2017, at 02:29, Paul Templeton < paul(a)coffswifi.net > wrote: Thanx to all here on the list for input to earlier posts. Helped a lot. Question I have is there anywhere where you can get a block of IP address or lease as I'm in the process of getting a 10/10Mb SHDSL service(No flaming data cap :-)) here in AU but I want an IP range that abuse questions can be forwarded to me. The service provider doesn't provide ARIN registration but said if I have my own block I can update the BG and manage it my self. Regards, Paul PS - the best price I can do at the moment is $550pm - *SIGH* - but worth it. _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

2 1

Unable to compile Tor
by Alan 23 Aug '17

23 Aug '17

Up until now i've relied on updating Tor using yum update but the version on the repos is currently 0.2.9.10 . Arm reports this as unrecommended, so compiling from source looks to be the only option. I pulled down 0.3.0.10, untarred and ran ./configure && make I get these errors-- ---------------------------- In file included from src/common/tortls.c:52:0: src/common/tortls.h:140:15: error: conflicting types for SSL_SESSION_get_master_key STATIC size_t SSL_SESSION_get_master_key(SSL_SESSION *s, uint8_t *out, ^ In file included from src/common/tortls.c:40:0: /usr/local/include/openssl/ssl.h:1725:15: note: previous declaration of SSL_SESSION_get_master_key was here __owur size_t SSL_SESSION_get_master_key(const SSL_SESSION *ssl, ^ src/common/tortls.c: In function find_cipher_by_id: src/common/tortls.c:1331:21: warning: unused variable c [-Wunused-variable] const SSL_CIPHER *c; ^ src/common/tortls.c: In function tor_tls_client_is_using_v2_ciphers: src/common/tortls.c:1508:20: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type ciphers = session->ciphers; ^ src/common/tortls.c: At top level: src/common/tortls.c:2402:1: error: conflicting types for SSL_get_client_random SSL_get_client_random(SSL *s, uint8_t *out, size_t len) ^ In file included from src/common/tortls.c:40:0: /usr/local/include/openssl/ssl.h:1721:15: note: previous declaration of SSL_get_client_random was here __owur size_t SSL_get_client_random(const SSL *ssl, unsigned char *out, ^ In file included from src/common/tortls.c:27:0: src/common/tortls.c: In function SSL_get_client_random: src/common/tortls.c:2407:15: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type tor_assert(s->s3); ^ src/common/compat.h:196:51: note: in definition of macro PREDICT_UNLIKELY #define PREDICT_UNLIKELY(exp) __builtin_expect(!!(exp), 0) ^ src/common/tortls.c:2407:3: note: in expansion of macro tor_assert tor_assert(s->s3); ^ src/common/tortls.c:2408:16: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type memcpy(out, s->s3->client_random, len); ^ src/common/tortls.c: At top level: src/common/tortls.c:2415:1: error: conflicting types for SSL_get_server_random SSL_get_server_random(SSL *s, uint8_t *out, size_t len) ^ In file included from src/common/tortls.c:40:0: /usr/local/include/openssl/ssl.h:1723:15: note: previous declaration of SSL_get_server_random was here __owur size_t SSL_get_server_random(const SSL *ssl, unsigned char *out, ^ In file included from src/common/tortls.c:27:0: src/common/tortls.c: In function SSL_get_server_random: src/common/tortls.c:2420:15: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type tor_assert(s->s3); ^ src/common/compat.h:196:51: note: in definition of macro PREDICT_UNLIKELY #define PREDICT_UNLIKELY(exp) __builtin_expect(!!(exp), 0) ^ src/common/tortls.c:2420:3: note: in expansion of macro tor_assert tor_assert(s->s3); ^ src/common/tortls.c:2421:16: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type memcpy(out, s->s3->server_random, len); ^ src/common/tortls.c: In function SSL_SESSION_get_master_key: src/common/tortls.c:2432:13: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type return s->master_key_length; ^ In file included from src/common/tortls.c:27:0: src/common/tortls.c:2433:30: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type tor_assert(len == (size_t)s->master_key_length); ^ src/common/compat.h:196:51: note: in definition of macro PREDICT_UNLIKELY #define PREDICT_UNLIKELY(exp) __builtin_expect(!!(exp), 0) ^ src/common/tortls.c:2433:3: note: in expansion of macro tor_assert tor_assert(len == (size_t)s->master_key_length); ^ src/common/tortls.c:2435:16: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type memcpy(out, s->master_key, len); ^ make[1]: *** [src/common/tortls.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/root/tor-0.3.0.10' make: *** [all] Error 2 ---------------------------- I'm running on Centos 7 Alan

2 1

Bandwidth Question
by Torix 23 Aug '17

23 Aug '17

Dear List, I run a middle node at home. I jacked up my bandwidth from 300/500 KB to 500/700 KB a fortnight ago, and my usage has more than doubled. I run it on Verizon FIOS at home; I'm looking at about 650-750 G/month estimate now from vnstat. I read that Verizon starts to take notice if I get to a TB/month, so I am asking for advice on easing this back if necessary. I can limit the daily bandwidth - or can I just ease down the bandwidth? Clearly each time I increased the bandwidth I got more connexions; would they drop off if I went back to my old bandwidth? I'm a little unclear how long it would take other relays to attach to other middle relays once they have found mine. The more general question behind this is: is it better to have a higher bandwidth for a limited time each day or a lower bandwidth up all day? Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.

2 1

outdated key files in ./keys ?
by Toralf Förster 23 Aug '17

23 Aug '17

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 I do wonder if I do still need all of these files at my exit relay with verion 0.3.1.5-alpha ? $> ls keys/ ed25519_master_id_public_key ed25519_signing_secret_key secret_onion_key_ntor ed25519_master_id_secret_key secret_id_key secret_onion_key_ntor.old ed25519_signing_cert secret_onion_key secret_onion_key.old - -- Toralf PGP C4EACDDE 0076E94E -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iI0EAREIADUWIQQaN2+ZSp0CbxPiTc/E6s3eAHbpTgUCWZdBBxccdG9yYWxmLmZv ZXJzdGVyQGdteC5kZQAKCRDE6s3eAHbpTiqVAP0VYBto7mkqOnSirkklCU/EiiV0 CV06fXxqH8KDzW3wAwD+P/O6+gs/LEPLhP7OFo9XbgzyO2zrElusqDhPU/kSzCw= =nzsU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Does fallback directory traffic go over the ORPort?
by tor 23 Aug '17

23 Aug '17

In another thread, Roger said: > Note that most clients use the ORPort for fetching directory stuff, and > that's heading towards "all clients" as people upgrade and stop using weird > configurations. I'm curious about the 100+ fallback directory mirrors. Does fallback directory traffic go over the ORPort too? Is it safe to disable the DirPort on fallback relays?

2 1

blocking >1 connections per ip address onto Tor DirPort
by Toralf Förster 23 Aug '17

23 Aug '17

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 I do have the following iptables rule here : # Tor # dirport=80 orport=443 $IPT -A INPUT -p tcp --destination-port $dirport --match conntrack --ctstate NEW --match connlimit --connlimit-above 1 --connlimit-mask 32 -j DROP $IPT -A INPUT -p tcp --destination-port $orport --match conntrack --ctstate NEW --match connlimit --connlimit-above 1 --connlimit-mask 32 -j DROP which seems to work fine. An $> ip6tables -nvL gives 14110 746K DROP tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 ctstate NEW #conn src/32 > 1 230K 14M DROP tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:443 ctstate NEW #conn src/32 > 1 after few days so I do just like to ask here if the rules above are fine or if I overllooked something ? - -- Toralf PGP C4EACDDE 0076E94E -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iI0EAREIADUWIQQaN2+ZSp0CbxPiTc/E6s3eAHbpTgUCWZM4sxccdG9yYWxmLmZv ZXJzdGVyQGdteC5kZQAKCRDE6s3eAHbpTqnGAQCPr7gkpaxRD3spzKp49l53A2H0 YOzXrw8G8vR8BtHZPQD+NE4Zhf7Y0w0JtKqy6E5bSowikeSJsKSDur8zxO+kf8E= =UPak -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

8 11

Re: [tor-relays] New Here
by Paul Templeton 21 Aug '17

21 Aug '17

Another odd thin is atlas will say its down for say three hours but there are up to 1900 connections thumping away from other relays. The node has been running longer but I restarted thinking something was wrong. LOL But like I said its not a problem - I'm wait to see if the VM provider has an issue and at 5 euros per month I'll run others in other country's for that money. Shame its to expensive to run one here in OZ. *SIGH* ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keepyourprivacy" <keepyourprivacy(a)protonmail.ch> To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2017 12:18:03 AM Subject: Re: [tor-relays] New Here That's strange. Usually you shouldn't see more traffic than advertised. Atlas is saying: Bandwidth rate: 300 KiB/s Bandwidth burst: 500 KiB/s Observed bandwidth: 638.69 KiB/s Strange thing is, that the observed bandwidth is higher than your the one you are advertising. Maybe someone else can say something about this. The "spikes" can come from the measurments, but usually the aren't that big that you should see such a high spikes. The only thing i saw is, that you are using RelayBandwidthRate instead of just BandwidthRate in your config file. Don't know if this makes any difference? -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [tor-relays] New Here Local Time: 11 August 2017 4:10 PM UTC Time: 11 August 2017 2:10 PM From: paul(a)coffswifi.net To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org nickname: coffswifi Provider 1&1 torrc: RunAsDaemon 1 Address 82.223.27.82 Nickname coffswifi RelayBandwidthRate 300 KBytes RelayBandwidthBurst 500 KBytes ContactInfo Paul <paul AT coffswifi dot net> DirPort 9030 ExitRelay 1 I'm running the default exit policy... From: "Keepyourprivacy" <keepyourprivacy(a)protonmail.ch> To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2017 12:03:20 AM Subject: Re: [tor-relays] New Here Thanks for running an exit! Mind sharing your torrc configuration? Maybe something is wrong in there... Which provider are you using? Tor relay nickname would be helpful too <blockquote> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [tor-relays] New Here Local Time: 11 August 2017 3:50 PM UTC Time: 11 August 2017 1:50 PM From: paul(a)coffswifi.net To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Hi all, Have been running a mirror for a couple of years and haven"t had much time to dedicate to and exit node but have finally committed to it. Found a provider that doesn"t seem to have a cap on data and it will cost me about five euros a month. Question I have is two fold. First I find that atlas.torproject.org sometime says the node is down but its running and connected. Secondly how dose the bandwidth throttling work. I have set it to 300kbits with 500kbit burst but I can see the in/out traffic staying over 1mb for large periods of time and bursting to 7/8mb. Its not a problem just curios. Regards, Paul torproject.coffswifi.net _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays </blockquote> _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

6 6

significant rise in fail2ban alerts for ssh abuse
by Dirk 21 Aug '17

21 Aug '17

Dear all, we receive a significant rise of ssh login abuse mails which reach us and unfortunately our providers. By significant I mean an amount that starts flooding our abuse inbox. All abuse emails are structured the same way and point to Fail2Ban as originator. Do we have just bad luck and someone uses our severs to brute force all of SSH out there OR is there a new Fail2Ban or Linux distribution release which fosters or enables this fail2ban abuse mails be default ? As far as I know the functionality of Fail2Ban is old. If there would be a Linux distribution which enables this I would like to talk to the maintainer and let him know that he at least tries to read the correct abuse entry from ripe instead of bothering our provider as well. For a limited time we will now reject port 22. But really do not like this solution. I would rather like to find out the source of this rise in numbers. best regards Dirk Example 1 ---- Dear Sir/Madam, We have detected abuse from the IP address 1.1.1.x, which according to a whois lookup is on your network. We would appreciate if you would investigate and take action as appropriate. Log lines are given below, but please ask if you require any further information. (If you are not the correct person to contact about this please accept our apologies - your e-mail address was extracted from the whois record by an automated process. This mail was generated by Fail2Ban.) Note: Local timezone is +0300 (MSK) Aug 6 08:35:23 srv sshd[3534]: Invalid user admin from 1.1.1.x Aug 6 08:35:25 srv sshd[3534]: Failed password for invalid user admin from 1.1.1.x port 50789 ssh2 Aug 6 08:35:25 srv sshd[3534]: Connection closed by 1.1.1.x [preauth] Aug 6 12:26:03 srv sshd[28169]: Invalid user admin from 1.1.1.x Aug 6 12:26:05 srv sshd[28169]: Failed password for invalid user admin from 1.1.1.x port 35677 ssh2 Aug 6 12:26:06 srv sshd[28169]: Connection closed by 1.1.1.x [preauth] Example 2 ---- Dear Sir/Madam, We have detected abuse from the IP address 1.1.1.x, which according to a whois lookup is on your network. We would appreciate if you would investigate and take action as appropriate. Log lines are given below, but please ask if you require any further information. (If you are not the correct person to contact about this please accept our apologies - your e-mail address was extracted from the whois record by an automated process. This mail was generated by Fail2Ban.) Note: Local timezone is +0200 (CEST) Aug 7 17:41:14 vps3xxx sshd[32746]: Invalid user admin from 1.1.1.x Aug 7 17:41:14 vps3xxx sshd[32746]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=1.1.1.x Aug 7 17:41:16 vps3xxx sshd[32746]: Failed password for invalid user admin from 1.1.1.x port 60497 ssh2 Aug 7 17:41:16 vps3xxx sshd[32746]: Connection closed by 1.1.1.x port 60497 [preauth]

6 6

End of Life Relays
by nusenu 19 Aug '17

19 Aug '17

Hello relay operator, Please note that recently (2017-08-01) a few tor releases reached end of life and are no longer maintained (no security and bugfixes) [1]. Please consider upgrading to a supported release if you are affected. To find out whether you are running an end of life tor release you can search for your relay nickname on [2] or on https://atlas.torproject.org. As of 2017-08-19 still >9% of the tor network run on end of life releases. thanks for running tor relays, nusenu [1] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam/CoreTor… [2] https://nusenu.github.io/OrNetStats/eolrelays -- https://mastodon.social/@nusenu https://twitter.com/nusenu_

1 0

bwauth in testing
by Tom Ritter 19 Aug '17

19 Aug '17

After suffering the loss of maatuska's bwauth several months ago, we have re-provisioned it thanks to the gracious help from https://coldhak.ca/ It has completed an initial scan of the network[0] and is reporting its data here: http://198.51.75.50/bwauth/bwscan.V3BandwidthsFile This week I intend to flesh out the remaining aspects of the bwauth (debug logging, alerting to detect downtime, get a proper domain name, ssl cert, etc) as well as do some sanity checking on its output. If all goes well, I'll submit it to maatuska for inclusion at the end of the week. But I wanted to announce it here, both to give an update, and let the community take a look at its output and see if anything looks fishy. The bwauths themselves tend to disagree, partly because of the eb and flow of network speeds and partly because they are designed to (they all measure from different network vantage points) - but they ideally are in some sort of rough agreement. -tom [0] "Measured 99.7% of all tor nodes (99.6% of previous consensus bw)."

3 4

r-pi tor relay fails after debian stretch update
by jah knee 18 Aug '17

18 Aug '17

hi i am running a relay on a raspberry pi v.1. it ran along just fine until i updated to debian stretch. i have reviewed the config to see what could be wrong, but i cannot find anything. this is what gets put in the logs over and over: Aug 18 09:52:41.000 [notice] Tor 0.2.9.11 (git-572f4570e1771890) opening log file. Aug 18 09:52:41.116 [notice] Tor 0.2.9.11 (git-572f4570e1771890) running on Linux with Libevent 2.0.21-stable, OpenSSL 1.1.0f and Zlib 1.2.8. Aug 18 09:52:41.122 [notice] Tor can't help you if you use it wrong! Learn how to be safe at https://www.torproject.org/download/download#warning Aug 18 09:52:41.122 [notice] Read configuration file "/usr/share/tor/tor-service-defaults-torrc". Aug 18 09:52:41.123 [notice] Read configuration file "/etc/tor/torrc". Aug 18 09:52:41.194 [notice] Opening OR listener on 0.0.0.0:9001 Aug 18 09:52:41.199 [notice] Opening Directory listener on 0.0.0.0:9030 Aug 18 09:52:41.000 [notice] Parsing GEOIP IPv4 file /usr/share/tor/geoip. Aug 18 09:52:44.000 [notice] Parsing GEOIP IPv6 file /usr/share/tor/geoip6. Aug 18 09:52:45.000 [notice] Configured to measure statistics. Look for the *-stats files that will first be written to the data directory in 24 hours from now. Aug 18 09:52:48.000 [notice] Your Tor server's identity key fingerprint is <X> Aug 18 09:52:48.000 [notice] Bootstrapped 0%: Starting Linux <hostname> 4.9.41+ #1023 Tue Aug 8 15:47:12 BST 2017 armv6l GNU/Linux i've been thinking about moving this node to another machine as i've read on this list how underpowered machines do not really help the network [i can't say i could repeat the details of the arguments, but they made sense to me when i read them]. but i'd still like to contribute ... any help or pointers appreciated. dankon

2 1

blocking >1 connections per ip address onto Tor DirPort
by Felix 17 Aug '17

17 Aug '17

Hi everybody >>> Does a particular Tor server/client will open more than 1 >>> connection at a time from to the DirPort ? >> If you're worried about denial of service issues on the DirPort, >> maybe the simple answer is to turn off the DirPort? I think the >> only real impact might have something to do with whether old >> clients believe that you're a usable guard. > understood - removed those iptables rules Good discussion. My experience is protecting the dirport makes sense to avoid ddos attempts. During my Debian times this rule worked fine for me: /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -d $IPEXT --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -m limit --limit 5/s --limit-burst 50 On FreeBSB I go with something like: pass in on $IFEXT inet proto tcp from !<blockDIR> to $IPEXT port 80 flags S/SA keep state (max 150,max-src-states 50,max-src-conn 50, max-src-conn-rate 20/10,overload <blockDIR>) # release the blockDIR after some hours pfctl -t blockDIR -T expire 7200 # hourly cron job -- Cheers, Felix

1 0

Shirts
by Sebastian Urbach 17 Aug '17

17 Aug '17

Good Morning, I was asked recently by friends & family if i could get the traditional Tor shirt for them. I showed them the new Tor shirt and well let's say they really want the traditional shirt. Any chance to get it anywhere ? torservers.net is just offering size M /L and that's not going to work ... Thanks -- Sincerely yours / M.f.G. / Sincères salutations Sebastian Urbach --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)

2 2

Relay Operators Meetup at BornHack
by Alexander Færøy 17 Aug '17

17 Aug '17

Hello relay operators, DrWhax and I will host a small relay operators meetup at the upcoming BornHack festival in Denmark. If you happen to be around and want to join please keep yourself updated with the event schedule on the BornHack website or track the meetup event directly at https://www.bornhack.dk/bornhack-2017/program/tor-relay-operators-meetup/ :-) All the best, Alex.

1 0

What causes circuits to collapse?
by Igor Mitrofanov 16 Aug '17

16 Aug '17

Hi, I have configured a Tor bridge to go through a particular Tor guard relay (that I also own), as an experiment. Upon initialization I am getting this warning: "Your guard [fingerprint] is failing an extremely large amount of circuits. This could indicate a route manipulation attack, extreme network overload, or a bug. Success counts are 52/275. Use counts are 67/67. 268 circuits completed, 0 were unusable, 217 collapsed and 1 timed out. For reference, your timeout cutoff is 60 seconds". Both relays are running Tor 3.0.10. I have never received this warning before. How do I interpret the numbers above, and debug the issue? The guard is far from saturating its network bandwidth. It has 98% idle CPU and plenty of free memory. I am not running any attacks against it. It does use a tuned-up sysctl.conf but I have never had any problems with it. "tcpdump icmp" does not show anything interesting. There are no warnings in the guard's log. Thanks, Igor

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] keepyourprivcay: Introducing a new 100 mbit/s relay
by Keepyourprivacy 16 Aug '17

16 Aug '17

Another 100 mbit/s relay has been added, located in sweden. MyFamily entry set in torrc. https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/B92CADBD1E9A2F72E64D7DE5A1BF5B2B30DA7…

2 1

IXPs in the United States
by Christopher 14 Aug '17

14 Aug '17

Hello, Emerald Onion (https://twitter.com/EmeraldOnion) is researching Internet Exchange Points in the United States in order to bolster Tor relay deployments within our legal jurisdiction. We have blogged a list of IXPs we've identified so far: https://emeraldonion.org/internet-exchange-points-in-the-united-states/ Please note that Emerald Onion would not be the org to deploy more relays in other cities. We are interested in helping others in those regions become their own ISP. (See https://emeraldonion.org/development/ for related education.) 1. Are there any Tor routers connected to any United States-based IXPs? If so, which ones and who operates them? We know of at least four: a. Calyx Institute on NYIIX https://www.peeringdb.com/net/4594 b. XMission on Equinix Ashburn, SIX Seattle, and SLIX https://www.peeringdb.com/net/789 c. Riseup Networks on SIX Seattle https://www.peeringdb.com/net/9021 d. Emerald Onion on SIX Seattle https://www.peeringdb.com/net/14010 2. Is this IXP friendly to Tor? 3. What is the organizational structure of this IXP? Such as corporate-run or community-driven, etc. Please let me know if you have any helpful information. I'm also reachable via Signal. https://yawnbox.com/contact/ Cheers, Yawnbox

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] 60 new neu.edu relays in 16 minutes
by privacy＠ccs.neu.edu 12 Aug '17

12 Aug '17

Hello nusenu, DocTor and OrNetRadar detected that someone added 60 tor relays [1] with your email address in the contact info field on 2017-08-08 between 15:45 and 16:01 UTC. [1] https://nusenu.github.io/OrNetRadar/2017/08/08/a7.html <https://nusenu.github.io/OrNetRadar/2017/08/08/a7.html> Since tor relay contact information is not authenticated I was wondering if these are in fact your relays? (I guess they are) Yes indeed they are ours. We started them all at the same time to make it clear that they are all run but one group of researchers. You obviously don't have to answer but if you want to I'm curious: Are these just temporary relays and part of your research or are they here to stay to increase the capacity of the tor network for more than just a few weeks or months? I assume you are not planing to run them for a longer period of time (>6months), but if you do you: Please consider network diversity when adding that amount of tor relay capacity. All your relays are operated in AS "Online S.a.s" - which is already the second biggest AS in terms of tor network capacity. At this stage we are not planning to run it for more than 6 months or so (but this might change). We understand that your concern is primarily about capacity diversity not trust in "Online S.a.s" since anyway it's already the second largest provider for Tor relays. Our experiments are not related to the traffic (and since all our relays are part of the same family at most one of them would be used in any circuit). We are using Online S.a.s because it it is cheap (I guess it's the same reason why others use it). We will check in the next couple of days if there is an alternative low cost provider. We have also limited our bandwidth but can increase it if more people express interest and it can help (we didn’t want to look like we are trying to attract/intercept traffic). +-----------------------------+-------------+ | AS Name | CW Fraction | +-----------------------------+-------------+ | OVH SAS | 15.95 | | Online S.a.s. | 13.41 | | Hetzner Online GmbH | 7.74 | | Digital Ocean, Inc. | 6.65 | | myLoc managed IT AG | 2.63 | +-----------------------------+-------------+ Also the country (FR) is not ideal from a diversity point of view. :) 14 of our relays are in the Netherlands but will make sure to diversify if we have to restart them. thanks for running relays, nusenu Note: There is nothing wrong with adding 60 tor relays, especially with proper MyFamily configuration as you did. Thank you for the positive note and feedback!

2 2

New Here
by Paul Templeton 12 Aug '17

12 Aug '17

Hi all, Have been running a mirror for a couple of years and haven't had much time to dedicate to and exit node but have finally committed to it. Found a provider that doesn't seem to have a cap on data and it will cost me about five euros a month. Question I have is two fold. First I find that atlas.torproject.org sometime says the node is down but its running and connected. Secondly how dose the bandwidth throttling work. I have set it to 300kbits with 500kbit burst but I can see the in/out traffic staying over 1mb for large periods of time and bursting to 7/8mb. Its not a problem just curios. Regards, Paul torproject.coffswifi.net

5 7

keepyourprivcay: Introducing a new 100 mbit/s relay
by Keepyourprivacy 11 Aug '17

11 Aug '17

Hello fellow operators of tor relays out there! :) I'd like to introduce my new relay, it's called keepyourprivacy and hosted in the Netherlands, at a provider which is known for high uptime and great network connectivity. Because it isn't very cheap, it's not very common used for tor relays, so i think it's a good choice for a better network diversity. :) Sure, i liked the idea of running a cheap relay at Kimsufi or something, but there are so many of this relays out there, which isn't good for the basic idea of Tor. It's running on a dedicated server with an dedicated 100 mbit/s full-duplex uplink, which is only used for Tor. So over 60 TB can be pushed each month. In these days Tor needs more help than ever, because VPN bans becoming more and more common - look at China or Russia for example. https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/59633E5F42DDA009798B173944367D7F50B1B… I'm also playing with the idea to change this relay to an exit node, but i'm a little bit worried about possible legal consequences. I would run it with an reduced policy however, but there is still the risk, that someone is doing fraud - or even worse - transmit child pornography over it. And that's nothing i'd like to be involved with it. But i know that it would help the Tor network even more. But for now, i think the middle relay with high uptime, capacity and with a not so common provider like OVH or online.net will still help the community to improve the connectivity. Let me know your thoughts! :)

6 6

Two research groups studying onion services and running relays
by Roger Dingledine 10 Aug '17

10 Aug '17

Hi relay operators! I want to let you know about two upcoming research projects by academic research groups. The tl;dr is that they're running relays to do certain measurements, and so far as we can tell the proposed methodology is safe enough and worthwhile enough, but we invite you (and everybody) to evaluate it too. If you didn't already know about the Tor Research Safety Board, now you do: https://research.torproject.org/safetyboard.html https://blog.torproject.org/blog/tor-heart-pets-and-privacy-research-commun… The board's goal is to help researchers do better and safer research, that is, to *minimize privacy risks while fostering a better understanding of the Tor network and its users*. The board has been low-profile so far because it's just starting up, but now that we've handled six cases, I've put the details of some of these cases up on the safety board page: https://research.torproject.org/safetyboard.html#examples (Some of the cases are still anonymized because their paper is not yet finished or submitted or accepted.) In particular, check out cases 2017-02 and 2017-03. They have each put up a web page explaining their research project and why it's safe, and listing which relays are associated with the research. http://tor.ccs.neu.edu/ https://onionpop.github.io/ Let us know if you have any questions. --Roger

2 2

60 new neu.edu relays in 16 minutes
by nusenu 10 Aug '17

10 Aug '17

Hello privacy(a)ccs.neu.edu, DocTor and OrNetRadar detected that someone added 60 tor relays [1] with your email address in the contact info field on 2017-08-08 between 15:45 and 16:01 UTC. [1] https://nusenu.github.io/OrNetRadar/2017/08/08/a7.html Since tor relay contact information is not authenticated I was wondering if these are in fact your relays? (I guess they are) You obviously don't have to answer but if you want to I'm curious: Are these just temporary relays and part of your research or are they here to stay to increase the capacity of the tor network for more than just a few weeks or months? I assume you are not planing to run them for a longer period of time (>6months), but if you do you: Please consider network diversity when adding that amount of tor relay capacity. All your relays are operated in AS "Online S.a.s" - which is already the second biggest AS in terms of tor network capacity. +-----------------------------+-------------+ | AS Name | CW Fraction | +-----------------------------+-------------+ | OVH SAS | 15.95 | | Online S.a.s. | 13.41 | | Hetzner Online GmbH | 7.74 | | Digital Ocean, Inc. | 6.65 | | myLoc managed IT AG | 2.63 | +-----------------------------+-------------+ Also the country (FR) is not ideal from a diversity point of view. thanks for running relays, nusenu Note: There is nothing wrong with adding 60 tor relays, especially with proper MyFamily configuration as you did. -- https://mastodon.social/@nusenu https://twitter.com/nusenu_

2 2

alternating consensus weight
by Toralf Förster 09 Aug '17

09 Aug '17

1 0