- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Explain yourself Conrad Rockenhaus
by Tor Revolution 02 May '19

02 May '19

Per your LinkedIn: You worked at the National Reconnaissance Office of the United States which is the most secretive branch of the United States Intelligence Community You worked at the Naval Security Group Activity which is the United States Navy's version of the National Security Agency You have a Security Clearance but you don't specify what type but I wonder why someone with a SECURITY CLEARANCE would want to work with Tor Teor called you out months ago as a US Government Spy and I'm glad that the Tor Community Council is calling you out with. People can post all of the advertising in the world but as long as you're called out Mr US Federal Government Spy then they're doing the right thing. You are probably trying to push hacked FreeBSD or that hacked HardenedBSD stuff that no one cares about anyway. If people cared about more FreeBSD on Tor they would do it but obviously it's not a big issue!!! It's not a big issue to spin up our Hetzner exits at least we know that a spy not you isnt doing it!!! Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.

1 0

SENDME CELL
by marziyeh latifi 30 Apr '19

30 Apr '19

Hello, I have two questions about SENDME cell in TOR: Is SENDME a Control cell or a Relay cell? Which node does interpret SENDME cells?The node that receives them or the edge node(client/exit)? thanks

2 2

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

29 Apr '19

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

3 4

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

28 Apr '19

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

2 1

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

27 Apr '19

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

1 1

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

27 Apr '19

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

2 2

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

26 Apr '19

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

5 6

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

25 Apr '19

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

1 0

ipv6 behaviour consensus
by Charly Ghislain 19 Apr '19

19 Apr '19

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

5 6

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

18 Apr '19

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

3 3