tor-relays

tor-relays@lists.torproject.org

36 participants
4815 discussions

Cloud question
by Arisbe 10 Mar '18

10 Mar '18

Gentlemen / Ladies, Simple question: Do Tor middle relays and bridges work on cloud systems? Thanks for the intelligence.

2 2

DoS mitigation taking hold!
by starlight.2017q4＠binnacle.cx 07 Mar '18

07 Mar '18

Back to normal! Check out the final two log entries. Thank you David Goulet and all the Tor devs!!! Feb 24 22:45 Tor 0.3.3.2-alpha (...) running on Linux with . . . . . . Mar 2 21:09 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 247305/247482 TAP, 4620773/4622133 NTor. Mar 3 03:09 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 969715/1129528 TAP, 5195458/5196319 NTor. Mar 3 09:09 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 1847030/2202846 TAP, 5027827/5029068 NTor. Mar 3 13:24 Tor 0.3.3.3-alpha (...) running on Linux with . . . Mar 3 19:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 93572/93573 TAP, 5009863/5010456 NTor. Mar 4 01:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 169018/262021 TAP, 4539061/4539069 NTor. Mar 4 07:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 169753/235140 TAP, 4436073/4436112 NTor. Mar 4 13:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 119517/119547 TAP, 4040264/4041342 NTor. Mar 4 19:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 1098774/1119662 TAP, 4087379/4088944 NTor. Mar 5 01:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 223758/267280 TAP, 3828115/3828568 NTor. Mar 5 07:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 99975/113118 TAP, 3537541/3537974 NTor. Mar 5 13:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 173710/175951 TAP, 3792871/3793745 NTor. Mar 5 19:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 657254/747645 TAP, 3678773/3679332 NTor. Mar 6 01:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 606685/704653 TAP, 3186116/3186477 NTor. Mar 6 07:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 582036/708742 TAP, 2043464/2043654 NTor. Mar 6 13:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 54266/54266 TAP, *** 586327/586328 NTor. *** Mar 6 19:24 Circuit handshake stats since last time: 122817/122817 TAP, *** 558229/558231 NTor. ***

1 0

Exit Relay
by Gary 06 Mar '18

06 Mar '18

Hello. I have configured my relay (jaffacakemonster2) to be non exit, however arm shows me the following (I edited out IPs' & some lines after copy/paste from connection screen for others security / brevity) Connections (1878 inbound, 2113 outbound, 19 exit, 1 control) IP --> <scrubbed>:443 (HTTPS) UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:443 (HTTPS) UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:443 (HTTPS) UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:443 (HTTPS) UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.4m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:4000 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:9001 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:9001 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:9001 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:9001 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.4m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:9001 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 1.0m (EXIT) IP --> <scrubbed>:26155 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3.5m (EXIT) Atlas reports the flags Fast, Running & Valid. Lines as copied & pasted from torrc: ## Uncomment this if you do *not* want your relay to allow any exit traffic. ## (Relays allow exit traffic by default.) ExitRelay 0 What is going on here? I am confused as to why there is exit connections but I am not / dont want an exit relay. Thanks.

4 12

Shutdown relay 366BC592BC0154C0CD1D35C0E77D8F2C7F0B843E, upcoming shutdown 328E54981C6DDD7D89B89E418724A4A7881E3192
by Stijn Jonker 06 Mar '18

06 Mar '18

Dear all, This is to announce that with immediate effect I have shutdown relay sjc02/366BC592BC0154C0CD1D35C0E77D8F2C7F0B843E and will do so in about a year and half with sjc01/328E54981C6DDD7D89B89E418724A4A7881E3192 as it's a fallback directory. Thanks for all the support on the mailing list, especially with a stupid typo and the joint efforts in fighting the relay (D)DoS. The reasons why, well it's mostly based on personal assumptions, views, values and believes in terms of community/volunteer/project matters whereby quite possibly my views differ from the vast majority as such I don't believe it's appropriate to state those on a relay list. Thanks, Stijn P.S. I'll unsubscribe after this email, in case you believe a follow-up is warranted then feel free to reach out outside of the list.

1 0

CPU saturation attack/abuse
by Dhalgren Tor 05 Mar '18

05 Mar '18

Upgraded exit to 0.3.3.3 and now seeing a curious CPU saturation attack. Whatever the cause, result is the main event-worker thread going from a normal load level of about 30%/core to 100%/core and staying there for about 30 seconds; then CPU consumption declines back to 30%. Gradual change on ascent and decent. Another characteristic is egress traffic slightly higher than ingress traffic, perhaps 3-4%, where normally egress and ingress flows match precisly. Checked browsing via the node and performance seems fine--no obvious degradation. Elevated NTor circuit creation rates as-of the last heartbeat, from roughly 300k to 700k per-report, but not extreme (at least in a relative sense since late December). Anyone else observed this? Have any idea how the attack works? Captured a debug-level log of a cycle from normal load to full-on-attack but won't have time to analyzed it for a couple of weeks.

3 4

New releases today: please consider upgrading.
by Nick Mathewson 05 Mar '18

05 Mar '18

Hi! There are new security releases today. The official announcement just went to tor-announce, but I want to make sure that people on this list see it too. In brief: * Directory authorities should upgrade. * Relays running 0.3.2.1-alpha through 0.3.2.9 should upgrade. * Relays running 0.3.3.1-alpha should upgrade. * All other relays may wish to upgrade in order to improve their resistance to denial-of-service attacks. If you build Tor from source, the source code is available at https://dist.torproject.org/ . Packages should be available over the coming days. For the complete announcement, including changelogs, see https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-announce/2018-March/000152.html best wishes, -- Nick

2 1

Firewalls
by TorGate 05 Mar '18

05 Mar '18

Hi to all, I have a simple question, what is the best firewall solution ? With sourcecode and must be opensource. What do you mean ? regards Steffen TorGate torgate(at)linux-hus.dk OpenGPG 7FD5 65EF A4EF EEF3 7A13 4372 8409 49D6 01A2 0890

3 3

bridge behavior question
by Arisbe 04 Mar '18

04 Mar '18

Hello all, I have run a number of Tor nodes for five years but I started adding a few bridges last year. I have one bridge recently installed on a lease VPS that has not reported a single inbound connection in over 40 days (except for Bifroest hanging out). I see up to 4 outbound connections and usually see between 4 and 14 circuits. The IP tables are correct and torrc is copied from successful bridges except for IP address. The Tor version is 0.2.9.14 and the OS is debian 9.0 (stretch). I'm running obfs4proxy. I set ORPort 9001 and ORPort [IPv6]:9001. Tor | Metrics reports Advertised Bandwidth = 8.0 KiB/s for this bridge. Tor | Metrics reports Advertised Bandwidth for another working bridge I have with the same hosting company at 598.7 KiB/s. I suspect this variation is due to lack of connections by the unused bridge. I loaded a speed checker and it reported 72-Mb/s. Can anyone give me some steerage to help me get this bridge productive?

2 1

less than 3 bw auths available: self-measurement (with 10k cap in effect)
by nusenu 04 Mar '18

04 Mar '18

Hi, if your relays behave strangely in terms of bandwidth seen, than this might be due to the fact that there are less than 3 bw auth votes available. If you run a fast relay it is capped to 10k cw. This affects currently the 857 fastest relays. regards, nusenu -- https://mastodon.social/@nusenu twitter: @nusenu_

6 8

One pubblic IP, two or more relay on different ports
by MLTorNode 04 Mar '18

04 Mar '18

3 3

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

tor-relays