- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

doesn't Tor 0.2.7.3_rc like IPv6 ?
by Toralf Förster 29 Sep '15

29 Sep '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Looking at the daily traffic stats got from my ISP I had an Incoming of 50 GB/day and Outgoing of 1.6 GB with version 0.2.6.10 whereas the -rc now gives 8 GB Incoming and 0.06 Outgoing. Anybody with similar experiences ? - -- Toralf, pgp key: 872AE508 0076E94E -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iF4EAREIAAYFAlYJjuYACgkQxOrN3gB26U5DngD/VSJ00A9sstKQ2PNPYrJcJNFZ b+m0SJ4BJK84b9Tt3kwA/jcbLwkgiteMjCTqBRRmAEti8SQtSolvY24wP0GR7Luv =HFDD -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 5

Library Freedom Project
by Kenneth Freeman 29 Sep '15

29 Sep '15

This institutional support for the Tor Project is extremely important. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_Freedom_Project The Tor Browser and Intellectual Freedom in the Digital Age https://journals.ala.org/rusq/article/view/5704/7092

1 0

IP and SWIP for a Tor exit node
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 27 Sep '15

27 Sep '15

>> (2) SWIP/RWHOIS + ARIN/RIPE >> >> SWIP'ing is a bit exotic though some ISPs provide it. >> Be sure to use a PO box in the contact info rather than >> your real address if you obtain this. > >This would be for privacy reasons, right? i.e. to avoid >advertising my own address? yes >What if I put there my university address? >(I am a PhD there and we can receive mail. . . Sure, that would work perfectly. >> Looked at Aruba offerings, check this out >> >> https://serverdedicati.aruba.it/server-dedicati/basic-1-3.aspx >> >Thanks very much for the advice. I will start >with the small VPS one, see how Aruba behaves >in terms of handling complaints and abuse >reports and if all goes well I will consider >the option above. If you do, try to find out exactly what CPU it will have and whether you can choose if more than one type exists; check them against this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Atom_microprocessors Several newer Atom CPUs have AES-NI instruction support. With AES-NI a 1.6 GHz will "punch above its weight" as a Tor relay. AES supports increases performance for Tor relays by about 2.5 times clock-cycle-for-clock-cycle. >Thank you for taking the time of looking into it. Your are welcome, good luck!

1 0

IP and SWIP for a Tor exit node
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 27 Sep '15

27 Sep '15

>I have bought some credit on Aruba. . . Looked at Aruba offerings, check this out https://serverdedicati.aruba.it/server-dedicati/basic-1-3.aspx For 15 euros/month you can have a dedicated dual-core 1.6GHz with 100MBPS unmetered traffic. This will make a rather nice exit node for the cost and will run better than a typical VPS where one has no control over system load. Even with the low clock-speed, network processing latency will be very good. Probably is an Atom or maybe a Celeron CPU and the it will probably run at close to 100%--not a problem. If one 'tor' instance does not use more than 30-40% of the 100MBPS due to limited CPU, fire up a second relay. Up to two relays can run on a single IP address. But if one 'tor' instance runs at 50-60% of bandwidth or better it would make sense to stick with just the one. Non-exit relays typically load at 25-35%; is the intentional design of the bandwidth allocation system. However due to the relative shortage of them, exits run more like 80% of useable bandwidth as determined by the BWauths.

2 1

IP and SWIP for a Tor exit node
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 27 Sep '15

27 Sep '15

(1) In the guide it is advised to "Get a separate IP for the node. . . You have the right idea. Tor-exit node IPs end up on all sorts of black-lists and it's best to segregate exit traffic from all other traffic. Try pulling up a few exits using http://multirbl.valli.org and you will see this. In particular, Tor exits usually test positive on http://www.abuseat.org/ (aka the Spamhaus CBL) as all sorts of infectious malware bot(s). (2) SWIP/RWHOIS + ARIN/RIPE SWIP'ing is a bit exotic though some ISPs provide it. Be sure to use a PO box in the contact info rather than your real address if you obtain this. What happens is that the handful of IP addresses assigned to your server get their own WHOIS sub-record listed first before the ISP address-block record. Has the advantage many abuse complaints will go directly to you instead of first to the ISP. At one time some residential ISPs SWIP'ed their customers by default, but this produced all kinds of problems and complaints so the practice is gone. Not necessary if you can manage a constructive dialog with the abuse department of the ISP. Start with an email to the address that http://www.abusix.org/ lists for the IP and ask them what procedures they might have where you can have abuse reports forwarded directly to you and/or have the IP noted as a Tor Exit / VPN / Proxy in whatever system they have for handling abuse reports. Most abuse reports are automated spam from WordPress blogs complaining about brute-force password attacks and automatic malware-detecting honeypots. If you hear from a real person it will be extraordinary.

2 1

IP and SWIP for a Tor exit node
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 26 Sep '15

26 Sep '15

>What are additional IPs good for? My ISP sells additional >(public) IPs for 3,60 euro/month, would it be worth it or >necessary purchasing such an additional service? For the size node presently indicated, additional IP address are of no particular value. Extra IPs can be use for 1) running additional 'tor' router instances on medium-to-large multi-core servers with high available bandwidth (high as in 100TB/month per core for non-AES-NI CPU cores, multiple 1G connections or a 10G network connection for AES-NI CPUs) 2) allowing exit traffic to travel out on different interfaces than the OR port--not sure if that provides extra value 3) perhaps running a bridge node instance along with the router instance--is best to have non-adjacent IPs 4) for bridge-only setups extra IPs allow one to start new bridge instances when old ones are blocked by censors and/or simply run multiple bridges; again non-contiguous addresses are best If you can obtain a "bare-metal," "root" or "dedicated" server (synonyms) for a good price, in general the router will be dramatically faster due to better latency afforded by the lack of a virtualization layer and lack of competition from other users. Similar for Linux container setups where virtualization is almost free, but servers can be heavily loaded with numerous customers.

1 0

Blutmagie is Good Looking and VERY SLOW -- this script is VERY FAST
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 26 Sep '15

26 Sep '15

one more enhancement: added a -W option to have underscore characters used for inactive flag positions. Produces a single column for flags, thus enabling trivial command-line 'awk' and 'perl -n' scripting.

1 0

new exit node
by support＠ruggedinbox.com 26 Sep '15

26 Sep '15

Hi we are running from few hours a new Tor exit node: 87.120.37.163 aka tor-exit-node-01.cryptonoid.com aka cryptonoid.com We couldn't register the IP with ARIN but of course the data center knows what we are doing and is willing to take the risk, we hope to be able to handle the abuses notices and are here to learn :) The current configuration is: ORPort 9001 Address tor-exit-node-01.cryptonoid.com Nickname cryptonoid01 RelayBandwidthRate 768 KB RelayBandwidthBurst 1024 KB ContactInfo RuggedInbox team <support(a)ruggedinbox.com> DirPort 9030 DirPortFrontPage /etc/tor/tor-exit-notice.html ExitPolicy accept *:22 ExitPolicy accept *:80 ExitPolicy accept *:443 ExitPolicy accept *:465 ExitPolicy accept *:993 ExitPolicy accept *:995 ExitPolicy reject *:* Does it looks good to you ? Currently both https://torstatus.blutmagie.de and https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/87.120.37.163 show the server as 'relay', not as exit. Is that normal ? Thank you, RuggedInbox team

3 6

Flipping from guard and back again
by 29230912＠tutanota.com 24 Sep '15

24 Sep '15

https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/113FCC01A29B4600A8BAA1CB72E6AB1FD899A… Any pointers about why my relay is flipping between guard and not guard? Thank you

4 3

Legal status of operating Tor exit in UK?
by Jonathan Baker-Bates 23 Sep '15

23 Sep '15

I run an exit node with an ISP who initially indicated they would not have a problem with Tor as long as I was transparent about what I was doing, and ran a sufficiently reduced exit policy. They have now sent me evidence of malicious traffic coming from the exit. I don't think they've had any 3rd party complaints about this traffic, but they have expressed various misgivings about Tor in general. They now also want me to consider running Snort IDS on the outgoing traffic. I don't intend to monitor my traffic. But it occurs to me I don't know whether my ISP needs to be worried about it or not. The last one wasn't, so why them? I've asked the EFF about the legal situation in the UK, who passed me to the Open Rights Group. They've not replied to my enquiry as of three weeks ago. So does anyone know of any reliable source of information on running Tor exits in the UK? What would happen if my ISP pressed me to monitor my traffic, and I refused on legal grounds? I'm not suggesting I actually do that, or that there are even any legal grounds to refuse. In fact right now I'm resigned to closing down the node if my ISP turns up the heat. They probably have me by the balls. But I'm at least curious, and can't immediately find any information about things like public carrier status, or traffic monitoring conducted by people like me when it's done in the context of onion routing. Thanks in advance for any help.

9 10

Re: [tor-relays] Deciding where to put new Tor relays
by Virgil Griffith 22 Sep '15

22 Sep '15

After talking with APNIC/RIPE, it looks like that if we ask nicely we can get high-quality BGP-peering graphs for the entire Internet (not 100% complete, but it's the same data they use internally). Spend some time thinking about exactly what kinds of attacks we wish to harden against. Once we understand the attacks, I'll figure out the appropriate graph-theory for hardening against it. -V On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 6:48 PM Moritz Bartl <moritz(a)torservers.net> wrote: > Interesting, thanks for the update. Maybe we can find some time at the > dev meeting to chat. :) > > Moritz > > On 09/10/2015 07:12 AM, Virgil Griffith wrote: > > I'm at an APNIC conference in Jakarta, and they demoed a new tool which > > shows the interconnections (peering + transits) between AS numbers > > within a given country (will eventually work for regions). > > > > URL: http://labs.apnic.net/vizas/ > > Left-panel is IPv4 and right-panel is IPv6. > > > > Here is the fellow who built it: > > https://www.linkedin.com/pub/geoff-huston/42/828/891 > > > > > > For Tor, this tool helps us prioritize the ASs for new relays. To > > maximize censorship resistance, we would want relays on AS numbers in > > the middle (lots of interconnections) that do not currently have Tor > relays. > > > > We can imagine giving out Roster bonus points depending on the > > AS-number. The points would go something like: > > > > AS_i_bonus_points = ASweight(i) / #_Tor_relays_on_AS > > > > ASweight(i) = k * \sum_{j=1}^n num_ips_routed_by_edge_i_j > > where k is an arbitrary constant (k=1 is reasonable). > > > > This could be very useful for deciding where to put new relays. I'll > > see if I can access to the raw data that generates these graphs so we > > have more than just pretty pictures. > > > > Much love, > > -V > > -- > Moritz Bartl > https://www.torservers.net/ >

2 2

Tor is starting without the -f /etc/tor/torrc option
by Tor Stuff 21 Sep '15

21 Sep '15

I am running tor on a new Ubuntu 14.04.3 LTS system. I have restarted tor a couple of times with service tor restart I noticed when I start arm that it is telling me that The torrc differs from what tor's using. You can issue sighup to reload ... It seems that tor is running with default values and is not reading /etc/tor/torrc as there is no ... -f /etc/tor/torrc option being used by the running tor when it is displayed with 'ps'. The 'ps' output for the tor instance is /usr/bin/tor --defaults-torrc /usr/share/tor/tor-service-defaults-torrc --hush I had asumed that because I have set DirPort to 80 and ORPort to 443 in /etc/tor/torrc and can see in the tor log files that those two ports are reachable from outside, that the running tor was reading /etc/tot/torrc. Something is amiss with my tor configuration but I don't know what. Any hints as to where to look would be welcome while I try to RTFM again! Cheers Q

4 3

Non-standard Bridge
by Geoff Down 21 Sep '15

21 Sep '15

Hello all, I'm trying to set up a Bridge/Client Tor instance with the following torrc: ControlPort 9051 ExitPolicy reject *:* HashedControlPassword <pwd> Nickname <nickname> ORListenAddress 0.0.0.0:9001 ORPort 80 BridgeRelay 1 ContactInfo <contactinfo> Should this work as a bridge? Client functionality is fine (port 80 is forwarded to 9001) but there is no reachability test in the log. I have a "bridge's hashed identity key fingerprint" in there; where is it I can check online to be sure the BridgeDB has received it? I wanted to check it worked with fixed ports before I tried 'ORPort auto'. GD -- http://www.fastmail.com - Faster than the air-speed velocity of an unladen european swallow

3 5

Fwd: WG: Tor is starting without the -f /etc/tor/torrc option
by Christian 21 Sep '15

21 Sep '15

-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -------- Betreff: WG: [tor-relays] Tor is starting without the -f /etc/tor/torrc option Datum: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 18:38:36 +0200 (MEST) Von: brightsidedarkside(a)t-online.de An: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Sorry, to dumb to handle Android Mail. And prone to mistrust regarding my private address. Gesendet mit meinem HTC ----- Forwarded message ----- Von: An: "Billy Humphreys" <PokeAcer549(a)outlook.com> Betreff: [tor-relays] Tor is starting without the -f /etc/tor/torrc option Datum: Mo., Sep. 21, 2015 18:36 Hi all, I might miss the point, but as I also run Tor on Ubuntu, I can confirm it reads both config files, the default one and my torrc. The default one makes sure e.g. privilege dropping to user debian-tor and a few other things in case you miss to set them properly. My ORPort and other config is done via my torrc. And I would bet a cup of tasty coffee that Tor on Ubuntu looks for /etc/torrc and not for /etc/tor/torrc, but I always lose when I'm willing to bet, so I guess it's just a little stubborn. Greetings to you all. Christian Gesendet mit meinem HTC ----- Reply message ----- Von: "Billy Humphreys" <PokeAcer549(a)outlook.com> An: <tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org> Betreff: [tor-relays] Tor is starting without the -f /etc/tor/torrc option Datum: Mo., Sep. 21, 2015 18:15 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 It normally uses /usr/bin/<service name> On 21/09/2015 15:50, Sean Greenslade wrote: > On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 09:05:21PM +0100, Tor Stuff wrote: >> I am running tor on a new Ubuntu 14.04.3 LTS system. I have >> restarted tor a couple of times with >> >> service tor restart >> >> I noticed when I start arm that it is telling me that >> >> The torrc differs from what tor's using. You can issue sighup to >> reload ... >> >> It seems that tor is running with default values and is not >> reading /etc/tor/torrc as there is no ... -f /etc/tor/torrc >> option being used by the running tor when it is displayed with >> 'ps'. >> >> The 'ps' output for the tor instance is >> >> /usr/bin/tor --defaults-torrc >> /usr/share/tor/tor-service-defaults-torrc --hush >> >> I had asumed that because I have set DirPort to 80 and ORPort to >> 443 in /etc/tor/torrc and can see in the tor log files that those >> two ports are reachable from outside, that the running tor was >> reading /etc/tot/torrc. >> >> Something is amiss with my tor configuration but I don't know >> what. >> >> Any hints as to where to look would be welcome while I try to >> RTFM again! >> >> Cheers >> >> Q > > This isn't really a Tor issue, it's an Ubuntu one. But you need to > figure out how "service" is launching Tor and change it to point to > your /etc torrc. > > --Sean _______________________________________________ tor-relays > mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > - -- _______________________________________________ My GPG keyID is 0x6DEF6C26 - the key is avaliable on most keyservers. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJWAC06AAoJEHukJMVt72wm7g8P/2QB01RxefD5hGFFwlt2k651 RwPeD1FaeAlRUDTsb4nUpxv0Cy5tYvzMmlqOx5YbWNgH7iBqYynoUXuWSgD/skfp Zfycin75lSOSLv5nj3gFDfh6z7xivxcwl8sfrtS/wRNmWtPaiVPx+uz+7K8Vr/qn 1A5QADFoCRBaQtl44cXJWdWtg5CKtPoCHEA95vYQDMunoL0diJJJyQH3wq7ERRgJ kamoZn6EtIVx+EJYkZmQ21GXTa9c5hjkW+reI6XUKZkgnq61Vbkw6HkRW7UUo8/y rp8q5sYmDCL61fZnSD7DeBFBBj7ajnccsGzjV5bBG9ztD7iTVvh0SWu05FaghcRu gpZ+/M7Z/8OUkCgr6F4YFAuE6mwJIcF8azSFXvuCsiVVfxo6DA8BGjzvLouZvdkx Q8SfCQYKUCAURtIamws5jRZHk+dSkktPvWqu4KMfmxbvtrA9xt8h2B/6+ix0c2X2 OXd13fl+D0E/Hu7Ka653SUBxiOJ2AbRGQDh998SjfAWA0qqkXLDTn6q6APlCB3g2 yjl03EVPdqx8zjGcQfeHhtmoEpWo92nPWzpXVeHODOu3UrTVF+wN5zlFf/NkVb16 v0kuyzCtnd5EZ8AbyI/c2ZGANMffuv47kHq8u2VQ+hZJJrN22Lc4Zs/PD31sBZGD 5WhIC9mkp/WD6rt9/+K9 =37jU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

3 2

Why are Globe/Atlas not showing my upgraded (& advertised) bandwidth
by Tor Stuff 20 Sep '15

20 Sep '15

It is now more 7 hours since I restarted my Middle Relay after the upgrade to my broadband to FTTC which by various tests is consistently showing more than 75/20 Mbits/s speeds now. I edited my torrc file and set RelayBandwidthRate and RelayBandwidthBurst to 2.5 MBytes to reflect my new fast connection. The Tor log shows that both the DirPort and ORPort are reachable from the outside since the restart. Arm is correctly showing my bandwidth (limit & burst) as 20 Mb/s. However both Globe and Atlas are showing an Advertised Bandwidth which is less than my previous RelayBandwidthRate and RelayBandwidthBurst settings of 100 KBytes and 110 KBytes respectively! I have been running this node (nickname 'Geheimschreiber') with fingerprint C69D24F9353E16D85E82B4A9E4571DFAF6DCF531 for many months so expected Atlas/Globe to pickup my changed capabilities fairly quickly. Am I being too impatient or have I omitted something in my Tor configuration? Thanks Q

2 2

Blutmagie is Good Looking and VERY SLOW -- this script is VERY FAST
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 19 Sep '15

19 Sep '15

improved: 1) flags on left side for easy left-anchor grep'ping 2) authority flag shares exit flag column 3) "a" alpha and "r" rc appended to version 4) OS flag in separate aligned column NOTES no "directory" flag since dir-port is "none" when not present no "valid" or "running" flags since such routers are excluded from the ranking Blutmagie has a "x" flag for "bad exit", no HDdir flag Rueckgr has a "h" HDdir flag, but no "bad exit" flag

1 0

Blutmagie is Good Looking and VERY SLOW -- this script is VERY FAST
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 18 Sep '15

18 Sep '15

For those who like Blutemagie's excellent Tor node report and ranking, but find the painfully slow page rendering --well painful. This script pulls the same data via the CSV download and generates concise readable text report. 100x faster literally. Also a script for the newer Rueckgr.at TorStatus page. This one shows self-measure bandwidth instead of 24-hour average actual bandwidth.

1 0

How to determine demand/need for bridges/PT?
by Steve Snyder 18 Sep '15

18 Sep '15

Looking at the Tor Metrics page, I can see the number of bridges and the number of users connecting via bridges, but that's not enough information to determine satisfaction of demand. Are there now enough bridges to comfortably satisfy demand? Enough bridges with a particular PT type? If not, what kind of resources are lacking? How does one determine where the need for more bridges, or PT type, is greatest? (Assuming that there is any unmet need at all.)

3 2

Tor relays without AESNI
by nobody 17 Sep '15

17 Sep '15

Hi all, I am looking at renting a dedicated server on a unmetered 100 Mbit/s connection, but the CPU is a Intel G850, which is old (Q2 2011) and does not have AES-NI. Will this CPU be too slow to make use of the bandwidth? Thanks,

5 4

Preventing wp-admin related abuse report
by spiros_spiros＠freemail.gr 16 Sep '15

16 Sep '15

Greetings community, Over last eight weeks a Tor exit that I operate has attracted more and more abuse reports and the VPS data centre is starting to lose their patience with the amount of tickets they open for each incident. Almost all of the abuse reports are relate to attempts to access wordpress blogs by exploiting wp-admin or other scripts, and the servers are protected by bitninja, abusix, spamcop etc to automatically send abuse complaint. I am now receiving average of 2-3 per week. I have two questions. First question - is everyone getting this high amount of wordpress related attacks from exits? Second - are there recommended steps to take to reduce or prevent this kind of activity? Things I try so far: - run exit on reduced policy (obviously not going to have an impact on abuse traffic but did make the data centre people happy for a while) - full security check on VPS including tripwire, clamav, lastcomm etc to assure provider that the VPS is not compromised - Tor port on server has website running explaining that this is a Tor exit and linking to more information - I have offered to work with ISP to change WHOIS to my email address, but they do not seem keen on it (some blacklists that the server is added to will also block the /16 of the IP range) - Block offended host on the firewall (as a last resort) Thanks for any suggestions Spiros

7 9

Middle Relay has no traffic
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 15 Sep '15

15 Sep '15

>My middle relay seems to have minimal traffic. >Is there something I need to do or is my damn >IPS (Comcast) blocking me. > >Node name is gmojo02 > >gm Possibly the Comcast gateway NAT is unable to deal with lots of connections andj/or it may be an older, slow model that can't handle much traffic. Or possibly your connection is just at the low end of the bandwidth spectrum. You can see all the Comcast relays ranked by traffic by going to https: // torstatus dot blutemagie dot de and at the bottom of the page selecting Advanced Search: hostname contains comcast Some options: 1) have a new gateway swapped in 2) upgrade to faster service 3) switch to a static IP (an option for business customers) and configure the relay on the static IP so it bypasses the Comcast device's NAT 4) switch to Verizon FiOS, which is 5x better than Comcast for the same money 5) make sure the system running the relay is reasonably fast, i.e. 1.8GHz or better and had a decent quality NIC; run speedtest_cli.py and it should match your ostensible Comcast bandwidth w/r/t (4) check out what happened to my relay after switching from 3up/18down Comcast to 75up/75down FiOS https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/4F0DB7E687FC7C0AE55C8F243DA8B0EB27FBF… (keeping in mind the relay is well tuned) You can see all the FiOS relays on Blutmagie with hostname contains comcast

4 5

Re: [tor-relays] Middle Relay has no traffic
by torrry＠Safe-mail.net 15 Sep '15

15 Sep '15

As starlight said, you are getting the appropriate amount of traffic according to the bandwidth authority measurements for your relay. Right now, the middle/entry nodes are relatively lightly utilized. This is a good thing, since it makes for a much better user experience. With high utilization, the web browsing experience deteriorates dramatically as network request latency goes up.

1 0

Middle Relay has no traffic
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 14 Sep '15

14 Sep '15

[know I'm breaking the thread--sorry about that] >Starlight - I see your advertised BW is >7.26MB = 58.08 Mb with globe showing 2 >to 4 Mb traffic. Maybe I will up the >advertised BW on the relay and see if >that helps. That's not "advertised" bandwidth in the sense of something that can be adjusted by the operator. It's the relay self- measurement and is the fastest sustained speed the relay has observed in the last 24 hours. You can see this information in the 'state' file on the BW...Max lines. Verizon recently took down the connection here for 18 hours (central-office upgrade work for their new 100/100 promotion; they will not admit it and gave no warning --Verizon is not a perfect company either). Normally the self-measure peaks at around 80-90% or so of actual bandwidth and the 7256KB value is on the low side of it's range. Self-measure for GMOJO02 is 204KB or 1.6Mbits/second. The BWauths have the relay as: 2-gablemoo--w Bandwidth=204 Measured=33 5-moria1----w Bandwidth=204 Measured=59 3-maatuska--w Bandwidth=204 Measured=82 -- median 1-longclaw--w Bandwidth=204 Measured=131 4-Faravahar-w Bandwidth=204 Measured=185 I see this configured for GMOJO02: BandwidthBurst 307200 BandwidthRate 204800 The self-measure shows this relay is getting exactly what it should based on the settings. If you want more you must increase these values. This is what I ran with before the switch: BandwidthBurst 1200000 BandwidthRate 325000 Where the 325KB average-max is 85% of the 3MBit maximum capacity of the Comcast link (375KB) and is intended to prevent Comcast's aggressive and problematic traffic shaping from kicking in. The BWauth/Torflow system presently targets 25-35% available bandwidth utilization and the latter settings above will cause the relay to obtain something like the consensus 0.015934% value show by Globe for the relay here back just before the switch to FiOS, while the relay you have is presently at 0.000232%. Keep in mind the percentages fall steadily due to overall bandwidth of the Tor network increasing. The BWauth value for the relay here was something like 230k if I recall correctly.

1 0

Middle Relay has no traffic
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 14 Sep '15

14 Sep '15

>My middle relay seems to have minimal traffic. >Is there something I need to do or is my damn >IPS (Comcast) blocking me. > >Node name is gmojo02 > >gm Possibly the Comcast gateway NAT is unable to deal with lots of connections andj/or it may be an older, slow model that can't handle much traffic. Or possibly your connection is just at the low end of the bandwidth spectrum. You can see all the Comcast relays ranked by traffic by going to https: // torstatus dot blutemagie dot de and at the bottom of the page selecting Advanced Search: hostname contains comcast Some options: 1) have a new gateway swapped in 2) upgrade to faster service 3) switch to a static IP (an option for business customers) and configure the relay on the static IP so it bypasses the Comcast device's NAT 4) switch to Verizon FiOS, which is 5x better than Comcast for the same money 5) make sure the system running the relay is reasonably fast, i.e. 1.8GHz or better and had a decent quality NIC; run speedtest_cli.py and it should match your ostensible Comcast bandwidth w/r/t (4) check out what happened to my relay after switching from 3up/18down Comcast to 75up/75down FiOS https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/4F0DB7E687FC7C0AE55C8F243DA8B0EB27FBF… (keeping in mind the relay is well tuned) You can see all the FiOS relays on Blutmagie with hostname contains comcast

1 0

Middle Relay has no traffic
by Greg Moss 14 Sep '15

14 Sep '15

My middle relay seems to have minimal traffic. Is there something I need to do or is my damn IPS (Comcast) blocking me. Node name is gmojo02 gm

3 4

Experience hosting exit relay with Costa Rica Servers: crservers.com
by Patrick O'Doherty 12 Sep '15

12 Sep '15

hey all, I'm looking to host an exit relay in a country with a low node count. I came across crservers.com[0] via exotic VPS, and am considering using them to host a small exit node to start out. A quick glance at their ToS for VPS services[1] indidicates that their policies are pretty strict, but figured it'd be worth asking the list to see if anyone had personal experience with them before I rule them out. I've also contacted them about this. cheers, p [0] - https://crservers.com [1] - https://www.crservers.com/downloads/SHARED-SERVER-CONTRACT.pdf

6 7

My VPS hoster (Zappie Host) understood!
by Billy Humphreys 12 Sep '15

12 Sep '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, When I asked my reverse DNS to be added for my Tor exit relay, they said that Tor nodes were disallowed due to the ToS, but didn't stop me. I messaged back a few times (in normal UK time, 3AM over there) and I got this reply: 'Hey there Thank you firstly of understanding our position that in almost most cases the end user that runs the tor exit does without a care in the world leaving the provider fully liable for all the crap that comes with it. In our ToS we state "any tor nodes" simply to cover our asses as its (for the most part) not worth the hassle and misunderstanding later down the track. Yes a relay node is fine. feel free to continue with that. If you want to continue with an exit node what I will do is edit the WHOIS details and put in for that specific IP that you are the operated the IP address as a Tor Exit node. (SWIP the IP) Please let me know if this is something you are interested in this plan or just settle for a relay node as is. Regards and thank you for understanding Adam' If you sign up and are wishing to run a Tor exit relay, PLEASE contact them to set it all up for you so that you will be classified as a Tor relay :P -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJV7kYBAAoJEHukJMVt72wmo84QAJSIrI70ca1xSEHmA7Am4k8E p9UhuqSfFftE0/5F631QeJJkdgw6y47ps+et9jUPjxv5i8omTWtCamI9qf0h1TcY 4ySOoxyLaRfEuz00hAKrDJZXSfHoJoF9mCIPcQpNPZ2NwZ4ZbXiOv40k5Rlpyu4M OGRV//RTunwbqIooCnaCOeNljhEGit57hWmDoGu5wNUsWIFXGWCd6On1xlSkRq2b jUKltQY96/nxNPWv12BlpOmKszXAWC0AwzfLsLUXBY8Mal0xgRgXxCBQhQ4HiBgX le/4oX9MxiL6+TN6GW4KM3yf7jIryJMDBWhfm/rjc92deXW7FVDxJdJjBGkZoX0S QC8ALSnqAysLj93wylaR59onco8jXIYDZNfOjZSuCB9v/zIqbCXWrovKexqa3xbU SCLCj0bDT+5KIrFbkI5+XBtNR114g1p6oeDmaRb5dl8OQOJh+l15x4dAxJTb4hTF zvJGfnFvwQcBCEXZq6u4sSItUjDQQ5Jsc1yWexDcHta/8PoYKSy9iZWrOM9Wo7ny Ka1jrdc+rhVpFyy73ntqFhYZxPOcJSabazBXbiOgIQlZKQPOjl99kW8g/0zCrZXX mXDED+fkb/tL7BwGl0xTV8NOKt5qPo7U9Xf8POy9X3L7Rrxpvw32zpTq1+ZS/vmc +KBRsFMQmtApo1RdmlAx =O3ur -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

First Tech CU apparently blocking all Tor nodes
by Tor Relay ＠ WeFu.Org 12 Sep '15

12 Sep '15

It appears that First Tech Federal Credit Union is blocking all Tor nodes (including non-exit nodes) from connecting to their website, http://www.firsttechfed.com This seems ... misguided on their part. Blocking exit nodes is one thing, but preventing random people who happen to run a Tor middle node from seeing anything on their website is rather over the top. They do not appear to be listed on https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/doc/ListOfServicesBlockin… yet. If other people also observe the blocking, they should probably be added. I wanted to check with the list to make sure it is not just me, and get suggestions about the best way to approach First Tech and encourage them to re-consider this overly broad blocking.

2 1

criteria for why a relay is expected to be unmeasured
by nusenu 12 Sep '15

12 Sep '15

Hi, the tor network is currently doing quite well when it comes to the amount of unmeasured relays. I'd like to filter unmeasured relays for unexpectantly unmeasured relays only. Currently I have three criteria for why a relay is expected to be unmeasured: - relay is a directory authority - relay joined the network within the last three days - last_restarted is within the last three days (this is a strong simplification of "we assume this relay did not run enough to be measured within the last three days") At 2015-09-12 07:00:00 there were 116 unmeasured relays if we filter for unexpectantly unmeasured relays we are down to 12 unexpected unmeasured relays: +---------------------+---------------------+----------+ | first_seen | last_restarted | FP | +---------------------+---------------------+----------+ | 2014-04-08 19:00:00 | 2015-08-24 12:29:07 | 9BE65BAE | | 2014-04-16 20:00:00 | 2015-09-04 19:57:50 | 74BA3700 | | 2014-04-18 10:00:00 | 2015-08-27 17:14:42 | B34B40B3 | | 2014-05-14 14:00:00 | 2015-09-06 16:09:50 | 853D1645 | | 2014-05-29 13:00:00 | 2015-07-18 10:04:53 | D14A197E | | 2014-06-20 07:00:00 | 2015-09-07 06:15:49 | E96D712D | | 2014-09-26 11:00:00 | 2015-03-24 13:31:21 | B8D2E17F | | 2014-12-20 14:00:00 | 2015-08-04 22:07:28 | 1A397290 | | 2015-03-15 01:00:00 | 2015-09-07 10:53:21 | 9143307A | | 2015-04-23 03:00:00 | 2015-07-07 09:11:21 | 00F2D93E | | 2015-04-26 09:00:00 | 2015-07-19 20:41:26 | F2ED5032 | | 2015-08-21 06:00:00 | 2015-08-24 20:36:03 | 38B63BB8 | +---------------------+---------------------+----------+ If you have an opinion on why any of these relays are unmeasured for a specific reason please let me know so I can add that criteria to my list. thanks

1 0

Deciding where to put new Tor relays
by Virgil Griffith 10 Sep '15

10 Sep '15

I'm at an APNIC conference in Jakarta, and they demoed a new tool which shows the interconnections (peering + transits) between AS numbers within a given country (will eventually work for regions). URL: http://labs.apnic.net/vizas/ Left-panel is IPv4 and right-panel is IPv6. Here is the fellow who built it: https://www.linkedin.com/pub/geoff-huston/42/828/891 For Tor, this tool helps us prioritize the ASs for new relays. To maximize censorship resistance, we would want relays on AS numbers in the middle (lots of interconnections) that do not currently have Tor relays. We can imagine giving out Roster bonus points depending on the AS-number. The points would go something like: AS_i_bonus_points = ASweight(i) / #_Tor_relays_on_AS ASweight(i) = k * \sum_{j=1}^n num_ips_routed_by_edge_i_j where k is an arbitrary constant (k=1 is reasonable). This could be very useful for deciding where to put new relays. I'll see if I can access to the raw data that generates these graphs so we have more than just pretty pictures. Much love, -V

3 4

Vultr disallowing exit relays
by Carlin Bingham 08 Sep '15

08 Sep '15

I have just been informed by Vultr that they now do not tolerate exit relays. The wiki[0] suggested they were a good host for exits, and vultr's staff confirmed to me at the start of the year that exits are fine. They appear to have changed their mind. [0] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ISPCorrespondence#Vultr -- Carlin

1 0

Message from my relay
by DARKNET.IT 08 Sep '15

08 Sep '15

I need help to solve this message: possible syn flooding on port 80. sending cookies. check snmp counters Port 80 is the ORPort of the relay. Thanks for reply

2 3

Relay Stats
by Billy Humphreys 08 Sep '15

08 Sep '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 I've sent and received almost 10GB and I've only been up for 2 days. I was first a exit relay, then non-exit (so many blue outbounds!) now I'm a exit relay again. Here's my ARM message: Tor's uptime is 1 day 18:00 hours, with 31 circuits open. I've sent 9.69 GB and received 9.35 GB. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJV7wGNAAoJEHukJMVt72wm83QP/RJpihJTntgCXAMJQZW48CDT oX7Z1SVFDQnfkzgW67JmZmoyOSVjgmuBLXdsdICB/kvI8+58HA5Hj0kJiCyN3m0K IeEMXiUaY+yajg6TggZ/lXVAbpp5T3Vd12RNsXQlwHna6rxKLwySxKSpdjR9HZgt ei4MotC7j6wor2hoIsMftuqKSmKicjrnnlfEt/H0dZ2+qCqZ4RUsLu+TC7m1EMwc uBL6d7GYgroaTQ6VH0QybYzJzhEAFPG4AaQzg4OVNPe3h+Af+FhKuvRpIoG0yZSl PfUP5K1lfKcGGh+KLMeCqVawQbUTZJXxcTtDpio6I6O+T0QdUas2ts0pE/cI0JxE eKITCq9Va13xj99/f3qV8R7gXhPTgNmwPVyRCk2dO1gUfKMkX94ScwTrNTxXb7Gy vD6ofnfmAh0OGA5rjfaKTCrsPWD9lFErAva1OeTVaxmxVZFap0tKykgNp2HeBIeS nQiHaujIEyJsu4WJTyFPQ370YuOVGuzEYo6AiQTVQFCesz7pnMLrG724HQljLQIp PdLXUsCy0QFvlScqWUr6IXzNWilt8wkH9UHjPp6LDsWiRdD6l0/gJomqoSJbNC5p Qzz9DOO6uEvBY7Tki2Kgo29mE00B7O0DP8cJBwkm1VCG8oj4u1ho+r4DX4DvGeyh GNoSM1mSWs6gMgid/2EQ =1rSF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Bots, love 'em or hate 'em?
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 08 Sep '15

08 Sep '15

My relay says it receives about 50k v1/v2/v3 connections each day to the 60k v4 connections that come in. "Entry-ips" says it has about 35k guard- clients. Blutmagie says there are no pre-0.2.4 relays talking anything other than v4. So I'm left thinking that 95% or more of the bandwidth consumption and client count is from crusty old botnet bots running ancient versions of the Tor daemon. But all that bot traffic creates a lot of statistical "background noise," and so may be providing a service in making it more difficult for advanced adversaries to perform traffic correlation analysis. Thoughts anyone?

5 8

My VPS hoster (Zappie Host) understood!
by Billy Humphreys 07 Sep '15

07 Sep '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, When I asked my reverse DNS to be added for my Tor exit relay, they said that Tor nodes were disallowed due to the ToS, but didn't stop me. I messaged back a few times (in normal UK time, 3AM over there) and I got this reply: 'Hey there Thank you firstly of understanding our position that in almost most cases the end user that runs the tor exit does without a care in the world leaving the provider fully liable for all the crap that comes with it. In our ToS we state "any tor nodes" simply to cover our asses as its (for the most part) not worth the hassle and misunderstanding later down the track. Yes a relay node is fine. feel free to continue with that. If you want to continue with an exit node what I will do is edit the WHOIS details and put in for that specific IP that you are the operated the IP address as a Tor Exit node. (SWIP the IP) Please let me know if this is something you are interested in this plan or just settle for a relay node as is. Regards and thank you for understanding Adam' If you sign up and are wishing to run a Tor exit relay, PLEASE contact them to set it all up for you so that you will be classified as a Tor relay :P -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJV7kYDAAoJEHukJMVt72wmclEP/1jjw+mvLldLFq0Q38c7+QRl U16jrWdf9r2ngiDFEEJAYo35mZB48K+80KUjLdKdycn2FxjYFZSpTubWuJYQN5/b NV/gHTeLKhIWTTGFBEHwVSvY71BzwrBcWO2M2Np7ax75TgYgd9KglIgyqc5ORzAW NaOtAOIcuRuRbeOd2+TKeoqqYmhyHA+yHRxI6tCE4ZIMdpQmx9JQ5r2uH0OAgxJZ dDxGqjNJEUoBAoftMx2qxCX73F6X4k9FJ5srIMQQHU1RTmbVdD/ehLs0uPCSAdpZ VB4mhtrKx6prZ6kWIpFPucBbhRF7kGzb5Er8n36R1eb50HgbA+ZIfHLoo3lEHUMr OIVLdtkIzENNetpe2dZTbOE5307fuPaAOYgJbJjVeAOBaJ1mirI9CvHGF2VbuiVy PIuyUXqT/UPfaxYP6EnhOX3tFnGeBQwYzp9l8o5NFBsnn+CEOuIh0C2268hd9vny be4xSLsO0wqpE61s+2o8qzx2LEcd1Q+pbLEboa7nP3+iQnz4zA7qvuTmg22vzrlw vSLdsboOslsFEJ9VhCe2j/L7DZVKALGxOHK4XJDBj6Cfab1cDTcQw2hvSaTLOhVC tcxKQiw3twXsNQe3kiIIExcnOp7/XketBkAaYTavFFOlJkGAerkMWQCc2T1V+cdg chO8fJUW9KdXTkiAeCPj =WpHn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Does Setting Up a Bridge Relay Disable the Browser?
by Kenneth Freeman 07 Sep '15

07 Sep '15

This may be a naïve question, but I've fired up my 64-bit Debian box now that the nights are cool, and editing the torrc to establish a bridge relay borks the browser. I provide anonymity much more than I use it myself, but is the bridge relay copacetic? Thanks in advance.

5 9

Relay Speed
by Billy Humphreys 07 Sep '15

07 Sep '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 I'm happy - my Tor relay says it's advertised bandwith is 1.1MB/s and it is. Quote from Atlas: Bandwidth rate: 1073.74 MB/s Bandwidth burst: 2147.48 MB/s Observed bandwidth: 1.11 MB/s Hopefully if I can keep this up, I'll be qualifying for a shirt from Tor . -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJV7aL8AAoJEHukJMVt72wmTUgQAKq0tFA0ArP2LnGXy1/BNVus kpTooYAovokbnRV6PgKZoKGZsjU0AlRDMsRXuCYnyLPTdGZbGi3v5EljrlDdvL22 eCGSU3yryBG2Ity9OgIT/KuqdgL9DqisAsdL77WVMHfkOgMoFHTFwjCvseleMgZc H4tPR4J262PYTgJ1KwByIZYHXfpKwlSdHBlOEdUL1HVLCQZX9QscgGVmTTmOJqkI Qz7Be7HRXI8oGkK60CjnNs87rDTCBIDzc9hFs4MmBL7g3ogDMikQpO5OhoC0eN+/ QdtM31HS7EFIjqn/6cmLJCX8I3EBZ9bTsuvW7VSsC9xp6ZG2iaicv37zcn/lWuEd mMzZ7wqAh7wLQa4FGRTia99PGxYLVb9Sh+9EYVgrT8azjzCmPK+D9cXartXtf1yR pI7ISfhUsZlfz33CGkwiyIQBj8hvpOvaoVKA/4HvtAnnfmAikV+0TXHNn69Hg02a 7EaXjGnhvKhwPs8SRd/JpclUFHVw7N+Ft2zRW+y2GfTLaNtt4yKc3YqvTvO1KZ78 76QC2Lxzqlp0V/+4t4Wis41+g6ayt5DLt48jO8VK12rf5rm3Sg77IBqOqkzseTsm pbi2eUnh/MvXzxASUk44l+qEWUJDq3s+xayzN6O5LqaWvcmZEsoxio/mjw/FrZtg fBqqfYmgj8ct1Q4t7ypT =1BBs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 4

tor-relays] Experience hosting exit relay with Costa Rica Servers: crservers.com
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 07 Sep '15

07 Sep '15

You might check for existing relays in their system. This Robtex seems to have much of their network, which they appear to lease from other providers: https://www.robtex.com/en/advisory/dns/cr/crservers/ And while they advertise many network blocks, it appears it's all slices of just a few large allocations: http://www.cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/as-report?v=4&as=AS3790 http://www.cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/as-report?v=4&as=AS2385 You can download CSV of all relays from https: // torstatus dot blutmagie dot de and look for matches. Otherwise, call or email them and ask how they feel about Tor exits. Hosting is competitive and if you run a relay with proper contact info and reverse DNS they might not mind. Ask them to automatically forward any complaints they receive to you.

1 0

About Tor Weather
by Billy Humphreys 07 Sep '15

07 Sep '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 BTW to all people, I asked yesterday about Tor Weather, and why it wouldn't locate my relay. It now can (https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/9CBD228738FBB0293A348680DF241B606 069E2F9), I just had to wait a day. Hope this helps anyone who had these issues (signup for Tor Weather, so you get email notifications if it's down, if it's not running latest Tor, and even if you've earned a shirt :D - --Poke -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJV7S8ZAAoJEHukJMVt72wmNOAP/Rg1S+y3IU66QUrERPRjQ9mG iHYF5Gb3Ei7Ompp2VMY6AMAbB3MSOwtsgJgSwySDOZIN8Qk+2E/pJ7P/lfk41YJz j4OcyYvEL0fXx0aIAOua2JVZOy+0ATCPAs41zX4vccRW6iOX78oXRXaV24CNLW3z xuCHTsBHKx+5alEzfXMwc/+4oRGVAISYZIco3frn63xGktso2GewdQYm7VnDIqA7 j9FQjDLurNH6SeX9xYUQT9Ypis1hdS5p2Sz0rCvNJ82njhE7XcMEL2B0p9hB/eG0 uYAu0pGNLg5jpoNL5qNnHhM1bBnRiy1+P6a1s801NndbEgBoX3H1yDDRJNHgv1wo JGf7PsYeET+lqNK3hx4eZ/YdaApXxbkI6qMNoyl7FjMn2QG3Hd5W05In0uADNxPd mKy3LevM7BUBgTbgDMBg91Fm5kAu9n/rucWx6jiI9h+59zSqj/LabGDFCuSv4QC7 +pQ0MGyY94Gp5zQRDWQR5BGS9/Y3Yw0R0FV/Bi99ZgBal8Vm59Jk/8/OZqegVpIE e199Mub1tu16eIymxKtVuawY8cleKYpl6Q8lnG3tWTEmpR6L2QHuXcTUSkM6zzXz vUaFNo5v1gHsHsDwyAEchT56sd5OaqcK3CNulGwkIn2RgcBV2WtSV1wlLvouOow7 ZqmQZml9MqnxBHaEQuUi =hmIr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

New Tor Relay
by Billy Humphreys 06 Sep '15

06 Sep '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi, I got a new Tor relay running on my server. https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/9CBD228738FBB0293A348680DF241B606069E… is it's details. However, I have been having issues with Tor Weather saying that it cannot find my node. Is this normal? - --Poke -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJV7HEIAAoJEHukJMVt72wmYFMP/3MF7z04Z8EoZmCBSeB9zkUP ZIdDIc0wiZxJugwOko0qJugcMz63/A+BuOeWA6fQ4KMq6OYyVulz5E3yiS+cE+mR bj3rJ37gLwtINun/j/9ve/uHx2cF1ZfQ/7eCVxKPCKu1nAtKpciHwhRVeV3EbYWB DAufC/GbVIqvsZYoTvocAMHZEsjWstjGTZWh2rY5jcah5bASyE0cXkYcpCO36nKq q01BDGimfrVgTDtgvwHJeX9CKdUjkb6qh57H5mqaNzHrx0V23L6dMbakClsIr5uY pUUes3SL/J1QB0SJV/x/ruVshdDeXkTy5tJt6DrZHupjPRDYkhzqgVuvNHgf38+U dGSLI/v+KcVM00yj9MxSAlWhsWOxNakqnWFf4FXVI+8gWOrm/taxKF/Y/KpXyDqY WT3T7CSUn96wvOMsAFxwJPGgxl2kZvkjEduJoZI4ou0ji8m04/gn157v/eR7hOr5 Dkil4y5mw9Kn5PbBToherLesW5XXPJgFlV+/Zq6eUUjxUN/uBSWLGetjaxAF1w8G FhDkq5WprAV5X813YAOYPIehlFfYgGkfQ2eBpZOIBgSHqgoJaAyE/AR6P4jMJwn9 uwe4ZbtFLfqrEnoZ15hcBIq8dhNnwnvD4FLoJLPnDvTuMgdRNobtzyKCTMd3JYqo l1cJWImHgTKTHFq+cTQn =+TEW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 2

New Tor Relay
by Billy Humphreys 06 Sep '15

06 Sep '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi, I got a new Tor relay running on my server. https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/9CBD228738FBB0293A348680DF241B606069E… is it's details. However, I have been having issues with Tor Weather saying that it cannot find my node. Is this normal? - --Poke -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJV7HEGAAoJEHukJMVt72wmsJIQAMFvjoRtktt0Mrt+wMU1/CF7 +00QSg1vKnIcM6ztljK+DgJhi+NLiETTkcmzgkTod40+aLVkqPuupy8+jt5Q7O+I IXFOn38zePPkk17W3nkDUiuYFSWsIB9TOS58iUVLmu6LJizB9O2SVz+yIRtLeLgl z0zucRYeMtqvhaiRROElqnJ87xnESjQA+9wDazkSUoN5tP9Vlzurf61NQJJayvC6 gJO2LWmbmiXr/e4SWtyBvXlC9dhHJY3WS8q6s/4nnb/JMXOhXDAwqHG0r9/YFt2a YVoK/X1cdqd901+2vyWFd2rNRLEYC+3S94i9laEEq5fGj14UVCYdoIunGGjVzYo2 GRmcvEo6CCt1dOCQmH+fwzlU7mPfNO+8FluLAUpgyTpCYe5Bjubb3OyMe758zjhP 5kiQ+oHqhitMHTH6gs8MSVRye4JgcH1/Jgyv2g5/cQyh0E8s/X2HmXlplpnz81Vf WPJYnR2GradGPRxCJlggpeqxlnXkWPbJPONAUpMqPG1Hvp+UKAic9uHs5PASobT+ zEIOSXCISwd2Nl4K0dKfy6sHvPQ+UjBlYpEp5skTkMrRfNitXYr2zcXN3NPD8Vbq 3k4peCh3E8IpXb5jxVwQ2r/WovRZWBYwpbeLFAFLtMmgeft4NKWhvWdpKV9BmD+R 6iWdeUqqvzeXT+kbvQqq =rOHr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

New Tor Relay
by Billy Humphreys 06 Sep '15

06 Sep '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi, I got a new Tor relay running on my server. https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/9CBD228738FBB0293A348680DF241B606069E… is it's details. However, I have been having issues with Tor Weather saying that it cannot find my node. Is this normal? - --Poke -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJV7HEFAAoJEHukJMVt72wmgb4P/0ePquz5amcKLfRHeKSL3K6e l161rledwcz5TRRitlkjXktFY7AHT8xRQ9PAKqK32Lx2t3T0KBSAk5NDzk7C24xC DwkBFCuJ2UkQgf87K5pjZcKnKXsBYNyaijTzfjhx+yTFwbBY0djK3t+z/Ye+Adcx 9xnXD/CqZM8R9yv7bVfWVa9lfXtKcXE/P7UpI9IrzmrfTVr025PenoQzYxYRhFmX PY8XhtjE4b1AzlGLX4+DymsBWeJdKe7ylfPLaUQpYWS56SAzXBd5QljZCiZApSwg MLxsZBVEB/1D+nHPOAWMOdg/5qkXOtvdyJE6tOODo3ISbHKAOMnsY98N4k7sQejL ctXj5NrZeUi9T5+NGFFx9ja2DpUGUG6B7LVwmxrA2Ra7IKEMVP6Qna5JbP92uDPV s9CiUz/Bd/5VERF+j2ZNGQZSjjdIQYxrsgtZ6gFFhWPXkUoI1KRTQMF9L7il/7+L 4m+Cqy5U6ozdQVwI/uKNtUpCE2m/OR607HCrH7uspYnleRmnv9SZl3fUSN3Q2x7E fsKGMko0OV0MR21A9KSXc3q+dgI5be+3hrfpwJxJbOfFGw260V5N6AWMs/YYGz8R dLRwDGtnFRnRGvSBts4+zJd9yxpAn24NRXFiztpyWQidFXfRKHLpS+hBgWjTDYvm 0MYLZkvxTeyxPb7o3Q2X =CeMC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Calling for more Exit Relays
by s7r 03 Sep '15

03 Sep '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hello, In the last 48 hours we went under the 'psychological' threshold of 1000 Exit Relays in the consensus. Right now, Thu Aug 20 23:57:02 UTC 2015, we have: 6234 Running relays 954 Exit relays I think we can improve this balance. Let's do it! This is a call for everyone: Please run Exit relays, or if you are running a middle relay turn it into an Exit relay! I have been running high capacity Exit relays for a very long time, and I tell you it's not a headache and it will not attract any problems if you just take care of the abuse complaints. During this very long time, 98% of the abuse complaints were automated messages which can safely be ignored (fail2ban notifications, portscans, web CMS plugins sending reports about http fetches, etc.) and the rest were from very nice people who didn't know what Tor is and how it works, but after explaining to them they actually liked the idea - gives you a really nice feeling. Only 2 times I have received email from law enforcement agents (which are just normal people like us, doing a hard job) - a complete and clear explanation was all that it took for them to fully understand and eliminate any doubt that the server in question is somehow interesting to them. Tor is _legal_ in all sane countries! We as a community are here and I give you my word that me and others will personally assist, in the measure and ways we can, whoever runs into troubles because of running an exit, which is highly unlikely. It is recommended to reject in your policy port 25 (it's not needed and it will blacklist you for spam messages if you leave it open). Allow all other ports, or use the reduced exit policy from torproject.org if you want to allow only what is highly necessary. Don't think any longer about it ;) - - Email me directly any time if you need technical support in setting things up, hardening the server or need a customized setup adapted to certain conditions. - - Email me directly any time if you have the funds needed to run a Tor exit relay but don't know how to set it up, where to get it from or don't want to rent and run it under your real name. - - Email me directly any time if you need instructions about how to deal with abuse complaints and short templates for replies. For live chat come on IRC, OFTC network, #tor channel. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJV1m+CAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRhD8H/3NpZniYVIELenCvxKNKIEeR J6hvSIwsAJUzlk+Hm5v74f7uzeXoLwA8z/FtzKCBVACOvUoCo1b4/2hF3wBMDfcw CsSZC0AkkIdF+4ePSIsjAU8giOr2uXkCS9CSoRyDnIebmyx5RkSnFDXgTg6/QLJT YJBuTrAA2anxqCHmqL9xHEDM40JhTMP6N6CR3aR4CCPkVOeELyyLTSgb637rZzUs EuRkliktZifirhENxOHzvMVv4D4X60lXeSo1i347gdPwTGuNpiL5fPu+ET0E1sTh Ol8Prvi6XP9yBojW7Up0q1y6083JkguLTbxQDomnqEYT7LCCqAFVBwdc1xWUdg0= =kFIY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

16 27

clarification on what Utah State University exit relays store ("360 gigs of log files")
by nusenu 03 Sep '15

03 Sep '15

Hi Jesse, I found your email address in exit relay descriptors run at USU [1]. There has been an interesting comment on a recent boingboing post [2] that implies that USU exit relays store significant amount of logs without going into much detail: > dweller_below August 5, 2015 > > A very similar thing happened to USU. We received a summons from > Homeland/ICE to produce 3 months of records (plus identifying > info) for an IP that was one of our TOR exit nodes. > > I eventually managed to contact the Special Agent in charge of the > investigation. He turned out to be a reasonable person. I > explained that the requested info was an extremely active TOR exit > node. I said that we had extracted and filtered the requested data, > it was 90 4 gig files (for a total of 360 gigs of log files) or > about 3.2 billion log entries. [...] If you can confirm that the comment is authentic I'd be interested what kind of tor related data you are logging at your exit relays and why. thanks, nusenu [1] https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/contact:C20BEC80 [2] http://boingboing.net/2015/08/04/what-happened-when-the-fbi-sub.html

12 30

Re: [tor-relays] bwauth graph for August 2015
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 31 Aug '15

31 Aug '15

In addition to reducing Unmeasured=1 relays from ~350 to ~150, the combination of the new Torflow release and addition of the Faravahar BWauth have dramatically improved the reliability and stability of bandwidth measurements of relays, for both the individual BWauth values and consensus values. This shows up most clearly in the 3-month and 1-year Atlas graphs of consensus weights.

1 0

bwauth graph for August 2015
by nusenu 30 Aug '15

30 Aug '15

Hi, I generated graphs for bwauth votes. The graph [1] shows that adding Faravahar (yellow) as 5th bwauth significantly reduced the amount of unmeasured relays (difference between red and blue), at least as long as it did provide measurements. [1] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nusenu/tor-network-observations/master/pn…

1 0

Botnet
by Heiko Tropartz 25 Aug '15

25 Aug '15

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] How to Run High Capacity Tor Relays
by Magnus Hedemark 22 Aug '15

22 Aug '15

I think it's unfair to characterize the Tor community as a Linux club, or religious about operating systems. There is a whole big world of operating systems out there, and most (not all) have a very POSIX flavor to them that makes it pretty easy to generalize advice on running the service. The work that I'm doing right now is around packaging Tor for OmniOS (and writing doc around using them together), which is pretty obscure and has no relationship to Linux. There's definitely software out there that assumes you're building it on Linux, running it on Linux, but Tor is definitely not one of them. Windows is the only really prominent OS that I can think of off the top of my head that has no significant POSIX flavor to it. Its heritage is more from DOS and VMS than anything. It's an odd bird for people who otherwise work in POSIX platforms all of the time. Be thankful Tor runs there at all. Supporting Windows on a cross-platform app is no small feat. Maybe instead of throwing shade at the EFF, take a stab at fixing the problem yourself? The EFF is not some multi-billion dollar software company, isn't staffed with an army of engineers and tech writers looking for something to do. And, if they were, I've got doubts that the cost/benefit analysis on supporting Windows as a relay platform would turn out in your favor. If you're really dedicated to running a big Tor relay, and can't be bothered to help improve the documentation for Windows relay operators, time to learn a new tool and maybe not be so religious about running Windows for all the things? I think I've got 5 different OS's that I'm managing right now. No big deal. That's the beauty of the other side of the Windows fence. Once you learn one, it's easy to learn the rest. -M Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.ch), encrypted email based in Switzerland. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [tor-relays] How to Run High Capacity Tor Relays Time (GMT): Jul 22 2015 12:14:56 From: ben(a)reefsolutions.com To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Robert: you're right. The group in general isn't very knowledge about Windows. I'm a Windows sysadmin and spent a long time deciphering the Tor documentation on windows and it's poor. Best info was another operator who posted on the mailing list months ago. I've reached out to the website maintainers and gotten radio silence on updating the Wiki for Windows. I've added other things to the wiki though (on exits). I'm a bit perplexed on the OS religiousness since we need more inclusive for Tor relays. We need a status of liberty, and the EFF's push isn't enough. Sigh.... -Ben -----Original Message----- From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-bounces@lists.torproject.org] On Behalf Of I Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 8:29 PM To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Subject: Re: [tor-relays] How to Run High Capacity Tor Relays Moritz and all, I mean no offence to anyone since we're all in this for the greater good, but really approaching joining the Tor community is pretty hard if you are not a Linux wiz and know about servers or a number of other things. I have tried to look around the multitude of interconnecting links but a lot are out of sync slightly or are not clear because of presumed knowledge and understanding or are irrelevant because of evolution Wouldn't it be better to be clear and neat in the way Torservers guides are? Would someone presume the Torproject installation guide was not complete and know where to look? Robert > On 07/22/2015 01:34 AM, I wrote: >> https://www.torservers.net/wiki/setup/server has excellent guidance >> for setting-up relays seriously. >> Would those at Torproject think about linking to it from their >> installation guides? >> >> Robert > > https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/TorExitGuidelines > links to it, as well as to > https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/TorRelaySecurity . > Both these pages could use some overhaul, but they're not too bad. > > -- > Moritz Bartl _______________________________________________ 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

5 4

Google Compute Engine rejected as relay?
by Greg 21 Aug '15

21 Aug '15

Hi, I tried to spin up a relay on GCE a few days ago, and I found that it was outright rejected with a message like "Authdir is rejecting routers in this range". I don't have the IP handy now, but I could easily get another ephemeral IP. I thought I came across a thread saying that there was an attack on the tor network originating from GCE, and that's why it got blacklisted. I'm not finding that thread now. But is GCE going to be removed from the blacklist? I realize it's not a very economical place to run a relay. -Greg

5 6

Re: [tor-relays] Calling for more Exit Relays
by spiros_spiros＠freemail.gr 21 Aug '15

21 Aug '15

Στις 21 του Αυγούστου 2015, 13:21, Sharif Olorin <sio(a)tesser.org> έγραψε: >Could you estimate the number of abuse complaints you receive, or the >amount of time you need to spend responding to them - and how many >exits for how long, for context? I am the operator of exit relays in Iceland, England and Czech republic (as well as some non-exit relays where the providers are less friendly to Tor/don’t understand Tor). The nodes have been built in the last six months (financial circumstance only permitted me to start contributing recently), and I hope to run them for many years to come. As such they are all Debian Linux based with administration via Chef, so I probably spend an hour per month on the admin for all of them in total. Abuse complaints generally come in the form of automated email from Webiron and similar services, via the hosting providers. In one case, the hosting provider is happy to change the PTR record and abuse email in the WHOIS to an address that I control, so that they don’t bother forwarding the mail. I get about 5 of these per month for all of the exits, and no action is necessary. In rare cases, the hosting company based in the Czech republic asks me what steps I have taken in response to the abuse report. In this case I respond quickly with a polite message with the actions I’ve taken (blocking the host in the firewall, temporarily restricting the port in question or agreeing with the complainant that they will block the host). I spend about an hour per month on this task as well. The most frustrating part of this is when one of the exit nodes attacks a honeypot or connects to a sinkholed DNS domain, and I have to query the NIDS to make sure it is legit Tor traffic and my boxe s aren’t compromised. The other category of abuse is far more rare but takes a lot of time, and that is legal threat from a company or state entity. I’ve been very lucky and so far only had two such cases, both of which required multiple emails to be sent and staff to be educated in the purpose and functionality of Tor to make the issue go away. These cases took a few hours of work and worrying each. All of my exits have a web page on port 80 explaining that they are a Tor exit and what that means. Hope this is helpful. Spiros

4 4