- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

what ip,port combinations do Tor clients need?
by Martin Kepplinger 13 May '18

13 May '18

Hi, How does a usable ipset (hash:ip,port) look like, so that it is a whitelist for in/out tcp connections? *Everything* else from/to the outside world is assumed to be dropped. (DNS too). * dir auths from src/or/auth_dirs.inc * fallback dirs from scripts/maint/fallback.whitelist * current guard relays (parsed from a consensus file) anything else? Bonus question: how would you write this whitelist in iptables rules, assuming you have the complete ipset? thanks martin

2 3

PSA regarding Quad9 DNS Resolver
by Nathaniel Suchy (Lunorian) 12 May '18

12 May '18

Like OpenDNS, Quad9 is a censoring DNS resolver and exits using it are / should be considered bad exits. I haven’t seen any exits using it yet however I thought I’d bring it up. Thoughts? Cheers, Nathaniel Sent from my iPhone

4 4

Re: [tor-relays] tor-relays Digest, Vol 88, Issue 13
by flipchan 11 May '18

11 May '18

Great thread! I just use the recommended onces that support dnssec On May 11, 2018 11:55:39 AM UTC, tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org wrote: >Send tor-relays mailing list submissions to > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at > tor-relays-owner(a)lists.torproject.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of tor-relays digest..." > > >Today's Topics: > > 1. lets stop using central big DNS resolvers (Google, Level3, > OpenDNS, Quad9, Cloudflare) (nusenu) > 2. Re: lets stop using central big DNS resolvers (Google, > Level3, OpenDNS, Quad9, Cloudflare) (Tyler Durden) > 3. Re: lets stop using central big DNS resolvers (Google, > Level3, OpenDNS, Quad9, Cloudflare) (nusenu) > 4. PSA regarding Quad9 DNS Resolver (Nathaniel Suchy (Lunorian)) > 5. Re: Strange BGP activity with my node (Johan Nilsson) > 6. Re: lets stop using central big DNS resolvers (Google, > Level3, OpenDNS, Quad9, Cloudflare) (Nathaniel Suchy (Lunorian)) > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message: 1 >Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 22:16:00 +0000 >From: nusenu <nusenu-lists(a)riseup.net> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Subject: [tor-relays] lets stop using central big DNS resolvers > (Google, Level3, OpenDNS, Quad9, Cloudflare) >Message-ID: <5e7d99ef-9514-cee4-985f-7f1d4a21dfec(a)riseup.net> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Dear Exit Relay Operators, > >I'd like to invite you to check your exit's DNS resolver by >having a look at the following list of exits using resolvers >outside their AS (especially if it is Google, OpenDNS, Quad9 or >Cloudflare). > >You can search the list for you contactinfo, relay nickname or relay >fingerprint (first 8 characters): > >https://gist.github.com/nusenu/cb766ff7945fafd9f90ee7f211a2508f#file-tor-dn… > > >I extended the "DNS on Exit Relays" section in the Tor Relay Guide >to include specific instructions what is recommended for Tor exit >operators with >regards to DNS on exit relays. > >https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/TorRelayGuide#DNSonExitRelays > >If you found yourself on the list above and changed your DNS to a local >(same host or same AS) >resolver or found a false-positive, please drop me an email (off-list >is also ok). > > >The goal is to be bellow the following thresholds within one year: >- not have any single remoteAS entity control more than 10% exit >capacity >- reduce the overall remoteAS share to bellow 20% exit capacity > >the longer version of this can be found at: >https://medium.com/@nusenu/who-controls-tors-dns-traffic-a74a7632e8ca > >thanks for helping with DNS decentralization on the tor network, >nusenu > >-- >https://mastodon.social/@nusenu >twitter: @nusenu_ > >

1 0

TOR Relay Activity Reset
by Keifer Bly 09 May '18

09 May '18

Hello, for some reason the read/write status of my relay at http://torstatus.blutmagie.de/router_detail.php?FP=db1af6477bb276b6ea5e7213… has been reset to nothing (all flat lines) however the relay is still marked as “running” with it’s current uptime of 11 days 20 hours. I’d also like to note that my relay usually only takes 8 days to get stable flag, however it’s been up for almost 12 days now and that still hasn’t happened. Why might this have happened? Thank you.

2 2

Secret Google and Microsoft Blacklists affecting non tor IPs if on same server.
by gerard＠bulger.co.uk 09 May '18

09 May '18

Secret Google and Microsoft Blacklists affecting non tor IPs if on same server. Just had to shut down my exit temporally while Google sorts out their secret blacklisting system on my innocent non-tor IP. My server has two IPs, not consecutive. One I use for my own email server and public web server, locked tight and private. No relays, no proxy. This IP is not on any blacklist. Second IP is used for TOR alone and forced exit is via this second IP, and only has TOR-use ports open. This IP is not on any blacklist other than being listed as a tor exit. Torrc config has careful port selection, not port 80 except to a single /8 block. 443 open etc. Despite many other ports open, apart from the obvious at risk ones which are blocked, I have had no abuse notices over last year it has been up. Quiet ISP. ISP have no idea as to why Google blocked my IP (despite high traffic from second IP!). Alas it seems that both Google now and Microsoft before tar both IPs with the same brush and reject. Google just stared blocking emails from my domain to all gmail accounts It is a real performance finding out who to contact to undo this block. Microsoft was a pain last year, but this year is it is Google. Google’s own postmaster tools reports no issues about my domain! Alas: Mailog: May 8 20:17:16 server postfix/smtp[4079]: E36533E07F4: host gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[64.233.166.26] said: 421-4.7.0 [109.228.50.196 15] Our system has detected an unusual rate of 421 -4.7.0 unsolicited mail originating from your IP address. To protect our 421-4.7.0 users from spam, mail sent from your IP address has been temporarily 421-4.7.0 rate limited. Please visit 4 21-4.7.0 https://support.google.com/mail/?p=UnsolicitedRateLimitError to 421 4.7.0 review our Bulk Email Senders Guidelines. o31-v6si13678468wrc.44 - gsmtp (in reply to end of DATA command) Really annoying that my email server IP has never sent anything, no relay, no spam, almost no traffic so what is stated is not true and even their own tools reports nothing. Is Google looking at MAC addresses to do this? How can we stop it? I really do not want to run another server just for tor as that costs! Gerry

3 4

"NoAdvertise" needed for IPv6 DirPort ?
by Toralf Förster 06 May '18

06 May '18

When I started with IPv6 I put this into my torrc: Nickname zwiebeltoralf DirPort 80 ORPort 443 DirPort [2a01:4f8:190:514a::2]:80 NoAdvertise ORPort [2a01:4f8:190:514a::2]:443 Now I do wonder why I needed to add "NoAdvertise§ to the IPv6 port. Any hints? -- Toralf PGP C4EACDDE 0076E94E

3 3

rendezvous on non-OR circuit
by gerard＠bulger.co.uk 05 May '18

05 May '18

What does this error message mean? Is it serious for users and what do I do about it? “ 09:57:16 [WARN] Tried to establish rendezvous on non-OR circuit with purpose Acting as rendevous (pending)” This is on a Ubuntu VPS Tor exit, although exit is limited range IP4 port 80 addresses. Full 443 and others. Exit, Fast, HSDir, Running, Stable, V2Dir, Valid Gerry

2 1

Removal request from fallback directory mirrors list
by Dmitrii Tcvetkov 05 May '18

05 May '18

Hello, Because of latest Digital Ocean billing changes I request to remove relay 774555642FDC1E1D4FDF2E0C31B7CA9501C5C9C7 from fallback directory mirrors list. I will keep it online and updated, but in the long run (year or two) I plan to shutdown it. Thank you all.

2 1

Request for removal of an exit from the consensus
by Nathaniel Suchy (Lunorian) 05 May '18

05 May '18

This is more of a message to the directory authorities. After a discussion with Digitalocean - they will not relent on the bandwidth policy. The server tor-exit-us-1.lunorian.is (Tor Metrics link below) has been turned off for now - if the directory authorities would like further proof to confirm my request please email me. At the end of the month the SSD of the exit will be erased from Digitalocean's systems. I would hate for this exit to gain guard status and then be suddenly removed as it'd negatively impact Tor users. Effected exit: http://rougmnvswfsmd4dq.onion/rs.html#details/DF2E0ABE681206DD886E29D5190F1… Cheers, Nathaniel

2 1

dew questions about Tor-relay
by dave` dave 03 May '18

03 May '18

what is SocksPort, Controlsocket and Exitpolicy and Exitpolicy reject ip address or :*: is in my "torrc" file. can i set in my "torrc" file what ip i dont want/want to connect me?

5 4