- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Setting Tor Relay to Hibernate After 100Mbits
by Keifer Bly 04 Jun '19

04 Jun '19

Hi all, so as of Google Clouds pricing plans on outgoing traffic, I am attempting to set my relay to hibernate after sending 100 mbits of data per month. Does this torrc configuration look like it would do that? SOCKSPort 0 ORPort 65534 ExitPolicy reject *:* ContactInfo keiferDoTblyAtgmaildOtcom Nickname torworld RelayBandwidthRate 100 MBits RelayBandwidthBurst 100 MBits AccountingMax 100 MBits AccountingStart month 1 00:00 AccountingRule out Thanks all. --Keifer

5 6

Curious up disclosure possible?
by Dr Gerard Bulger 04 Jun '19

04 Jun '19

Conclusion...avoid http, 80 ? https://blog.duszynski.eu/tor-ip-disclosure-through-http-301-cache-poisonin… Gerry Mobile Device > On 3 Jun 2019, at 9:26 pm, Keifer Bly <keifer.bly(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > So I am trying to limit as google cloud has strict pricing plans. Perhaps I should go back to just running a bridge for now. What would the traffic limit for a useful relay be? Thanks. > >> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 10:40 AM Matt Traudt <pastly(a)torproject.org> wrote: >> On 6/3/19 13:20, Keifer Bly wrote: >> > Hi all, so as of Google Clouds pricing plans on outgoing traffic, I am >> > attempting to set my relay to hibernate after sending 100 mbits of data >> > per month. Does this torrc configuration look like it would do that? >> > >> > SOCKSPort 0 >> > >> > ORPort 65534 >> > >> > ExitPolicy reject *:* >> > >> > >> > ContactInfo keiferDoTblyAtgmaildOtcom >> > >> > Nickname torworld >> > >> > RelayBandwidthRate 100 MBits >> > >> > RelayBandwidthBurst 100 MBits >> > >> > AccountingMax 100 MBits >> > >> > AccountingStart month 1 00:00 >> > >> > AccountingRule out >> > >> > Thanks all. >> > >> >> 100 Megabits is 12.5 Megabytes, and approximately ~10 page loads of the >> average web page these days (as unscientifically eye-balled by me). >> >> Further, setting RBR and RBB to 100 Mbits (per second) means you could >> theoretically hit your tiny AccountingMax in the first second of every >> month. >> >> An AccountingMax of 100 Megabits is almost assuredly not what you >> actually want. >> >> I'm wondering if there was some confusion about the difference between >> speed and a simple of bytes. Confusingly, Tor uses the same unit strings >> (like "MBits") for both, but mentally we should be adding "per second" >> for torrc options like RelayBandwidthRate. >> >> 100 Megabits per second is a reasonable RBR setting for a reasonable >> relay. 100 Megabits per month is a useless relay. >> >> Hope that helps. >> >> Matt >> _______________________________________________ >> tor-relays mailing list >> tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > -- > --Keifer > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

2 1

Auto Upgrading Tor Using Unattended Ugrades
by Keifer Bly 03 Jun '19

03 Jun '19

Hello all, So I am now auto upgrading tor using the method at https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/TorRelayGuide/DebianUbuntuUpd… Upon testing, this is what I got. Initial blacklisted packages: Initial whitelisted packages: Starting unattended upgrades script Allowed origins are: [] Checking: firefox-esr ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'stable' origin:'Debian' label:'Debian-Security' site:'security.debian.org' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: google-cloud-sdk ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'cloud-sdk-stretch' origin:'cloud-sdk-stretch' label:'cloud-sdk-stretch' site:'packages.cloud.google.com' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: google-compute-engine ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' origin:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' label:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' site:'packages.cloud.google.com' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: google-compute-engine-oslogin ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' origin:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' label:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' site:'packages.cloud.google.com' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: libavcodec57 ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'stable' origin:'Debian' label:'Debian-Security' site:'security.debian.org' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: libavfilter6 ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'stable' origin:'Debian' label:'Debian-Security' site:'security.debian.org' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: libavformat57 ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'stable' origin:'Debian' label:'Debian-Security' site:'security.debian.org' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: libavresample3 ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'stable' origin:'Debian' label:'Debian-Security' site:'security.debian.org' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: libavutil55 ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'stable' origin:'Debian' label:'Debian-Security' site:'security.debian.org' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: libpostproc54 ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'stable' origin:'Debian' label:'Debian-Security' site:'security.debian.org' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: libswresample2 ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'stable' origin:'Debian' label:'Debian-Security' site:'security.debian.org' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: libswscale4 ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'stable' origin:'Debian' label:'Debian-Security' site:'security.debian.org' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: python-google-compute-engine ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' origin:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' label:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' site:'packages.cloud.google.com' isTrusted:True>]) Checking: python3-google-compute-engine ([<Origin component:'main' archive:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' origin:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' label:'google-compute-engine-stretch-stable' site:'packages.cloud.google.com' isTrusted:True>]) pkgs that look like they should be upgraded: Fetched 0 B in 0s (0 B/s) fetch.run() result: 0 blacklist: [] whitelist: [] No packages found that can be upgraded unattended and no pending auto-removals What I am attempting to do is automatically install new tor versions when they are released. Will this do that automatically? How can I keep this process running? Thanks. --Keifer

3 9

Relay Consensus Low
by Matt Westfall 02 Jun '19

02 Jun '19

My tor node: https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/B1B10104EB72A1FBBF6687B05F19… Doesn't ever go up above 8800 or so. One thing I notice in Nyx is that my connections never go above about 2000 in and out connections. I have advertised bandwidth of just shy of a gigabit in my config. I understand now that the "advertised bandwidth" is calculated based on observed traffic through the node, which while more reliable and avoids abuse, seems to be counter productive to a degree. Ultimately what do I need to do to get more traffic through my node? Cause I have a 2Gbps fiber sitting here basically doing nothing so I was giving 1Gbps to tor :) Config -------------- RunAsDaemon 1 ControlPort 9051 ORPort 9001 ORPORT [2001:559:c290::fffb]:9001 RelayBandwidthRate 45 MB # Throttle traffic to 100KB/s (800Kbps) RelayBandwidthBurst 50 MB # But allow bursts up to 200KB/s (1600Kbps) DirPort 9030 # ExitPolicy reject *:* # no exits allowed ExitPolicy reject6 *:* Any suggestions appreciated. Matt Westfall President & CIO ECAN Solutions, Inc. Everything Computers and Networks 804.592.1672

6 10

Onionoo and ASN Number/AS Name
by Conrad Rockenhaus 02 Jun '19

02 Jun '19

Hello, Onionoo returns “unknown” for my ASN for some reason (should return 63080) and returns “unknown” for AS Name (Should be GreyPony Consultants - as named in ARIN). I’m trying to find out where things might be potentially breaking here before I start connecting to the route servers at DE-CIX next week. Has anyone seen this type of issue before? Thanks, Conrad

4 3

Verizon.com blocked on Tor Middle Relay on FiOS
by Neel Chauhan 31 May '19

31 May '19

Hi, I have a Tor middle relay on Verizon FiOS. If I try to access Verizon.com on the FiOS connection running a Tor middle relay, I get this error: > Access denied, in accordance with Verizon Information Security Policy > Please contact us if there is a legitimate business need to access this > content. They gave an email address to the EdgeCast NOC that I contacted, but the EdgeCast support said I should contact FiOS and not EdgeCast, even though I think the blocking is on EdgeCast's side (if it was on FiOS then I would get a "Hmm. We’re having trouble finding that site" error from Firefox). Other Verizon sites such as Verizon Wireless and Verizon Media/Oath properties like AOL/Yahoo/Tumblr/HuffPost/etc. are not blocked on FiOS running Tor (heck, I can even sign up for Tumblr on exit relays), even though these other Verizon sites also use EdgeCast. For those who have middle relays on their home broadband connection (not bridge or exit), both on Verizon FiOS and other ISPs regardless of country or technology, please test for if Verizon.com is blocked. Thank You, Neel Chauhan

5 5

Tor relay operators meetup, 25/05/2019 @ RADIX hacklab, Athens
by Vasilis 28 May '19

28 May '19

Dear Tor friends and relay operators, Next Saturday (25.05.2019) a Tor relay operators meetup will take place at RADIX hacklab in Athens. When: Saturday, May 25th, 2019 Time: 19:00 / 7:00 PM Where: Kaniggos 34 & Stournari, Athens 10682, Greece Event link: https://radix.one/en/2019-05-18-tor-meetup/ Hope to see many of you there. Cheers, ~Vasilis -- Fingerprint: 8FD5 CF5F 39FC 03EB B382 7470 5FBF 70B1 D126 0162 Pubkey: https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x5FBF70B1D1260162

1 1

Tor Relay Operator Meeting at the Gulaschprogrammiernacht
by Christophe Kemp 27 May '19

27 May '19

Hello everyone, there will be a Tor Relay Operator Meeting at the Gulaschprogrammiernacht :) You will find soon more information here: https://entropia.de/GPN See you there! Best regards Chrëscht International Ambassador Frënn vun der Ënn A.S.B.L

1 1

VPNs and Ports
by grarpamp 25 May '19

25 May '19

>> On May 23, 2019, at 4:39 AM, Wallichii <wallichii(a)riseup.net> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 23 May 2019 04:15:36 -0500 >> Conrad Rockenhaus <conrad(a)rockenhaus.com> wrote: >> >>> I’ll be starting a free VPN service soon to allow users that are >>> blocked from using Tor at their location to access Tor. To prevent >>> abuse of the service, I plan on restricting the ability of the VPN to >>> only access 53, 80, 443, 8080, 8443, 9001, and 9030. Are there any >>> other ports I should consider keeping open for the service? >> >> IMO setting up a bridge will help more users because not everyone is >> going to trust someone on the internet giving free proxy, you should >> run a bridge if you want to help more users. That would be an input VPN... perhaps useful if DPI was breaking user's tor access protocols (to bridges or regular entry guards), but not their VPN traffic. Output VPN's could also be useful to allow tor users to bind their stack to it over tor, thus permitting UDP back and forth from clearnet... typical with voice video comms and a bunch of other applications that have been disabled for tor users becase tor only supports TCP. Operators would have to publish their VPN node info somewhere for users to use... or getbridges, getvpns. There are prior exploratory threads on this here before. Operators can also be running and supporting VPNGate.net service as both input and output.

1 0

Tor relay says it is reachable, but is not appearing on the network.
by Keifer Bly 24 May '19

24 May '19

Hi all, something very strange is going on with my relay called torworld. For some reason, the tor software is reporting that the relay is reachable and the relay is sending and receiving data (please see the attached screenshot), but after several days the relay is not appearing on the tor relay list. This seems strange and any ideas as to why this might be happening is appreciated. Thank you. running on Debian via Google Cloud VPS. Thank you. --Keifer

4 13