- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Running a Snowflake bridge on Debain
by Keifer Bly 05 Oct '25

05 Oct '25

Hi, So I am running a snowflake bridge, and here is the output after it running for a few days. Wondering, on my system, as there is no torrc configuration, is there a port that needs to be forwarded? How can I check if the bridge is reachable? Is the app from here: https://snowflake.torproject.org/ Thanks all. --Keifer

2 1

bridge relay marked as down but I can manually connect to it
by Eritque arcus 04 Oct '25

04 Oct '25

Hi, I don't know why but my bridge relay marked as down but I can connect to it with my Tor browser. Nyx can successfully detected my traffic and two others join after my traffic(but in other time it's just ~700B/s w/o connection). And every-time I restart the tor service, it will up for some hours. There is no error or warning in log. More context: I setup my first relay on yesterday(>18hrs ago) on Ubuntu 24, Tor 0.4.8.18 following the guide; It's on KVM/QEMU VPS with some of my other services. the status is right here: <https://bridges.torproject.org/status?id=A69AD85C2E175BD0F753E1CCBE5D4BA371…> and <https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/A69AD85C2E175BD0F753E1CCBE5D…>. Do I need to allow some extra ports? right now I only accept the ORPort and block any others. Or it may relatives with my VPS ISP? -- Best, Eritque Arcus

3 3

It has been a good run, hasn't it?
by Ralph Seichter 24 Sep '25

24 Sep '25

I am sorry to say that after more than 9 years of continuous service, Tor node 0C3D5E19E3C75B505C8ACD26F89DCA2DF970553E is scheduled to cease operations on 2025-09-30. It has certainly been a good run and I am unhappy to see HORUS1 go dark, but the costs for the dedicated machine can no longer be justified. There were recurring abuse complaints forwared to me, by people who don't understand that a non-exit Tor node poses no threat and even due to IP packet spoofing, but that's something I was (and am) willing to deal with. Alas, money is tight. -Ralph

4 5

Automated Snowflake and WebTunnel role deployment now supports Debian Trixie
by Jacobo Nájera 24 Sep '25

24 Sep '25

Hi, Support for Debian Trixie has been added to the WebTunnel and Snowflake Ansible roles. With these roles, you can install, configure, and operate WebTunnel and Snowflake bridges for the Tor network. The roles are now fully compatible with Debian Trixie, which will receive full support until August 9, 2028, and LTS support until June 30, 2030. More details are available on the Acuarela Taller website: WebTunnel https://acuarelataller.org/en/ansible-webtunnel-bridges-tor-network/ Snowflake https://acuarelataller.org/en/ansible-for-tor-network-snowflake-bridges/ Best regards, Jacobo

1 0

(JAILED) U.S. Tor Operator Persecuted by FBI After Refusing Decrypt Requests
by Adrienne Rockenhaus 16 Sep '25

16 Sep '25

Hello Tor-Relays Community, I’m writing to you because my husband, Conrad Rockenhaus, was a member of your community. He was a long-time Tor relay operator, and he is now in serious danger. I believe you are one of the few groups who will truly understand why. Conrad’s ordeal began when he refused to help the FBI decrypt traffic from his exit nodes. Months later, the government arrested him. Their official reason was a minor, non-violent CFAA charge from a workplace dispute that had nothing to do with Tor. He was convicted of a single count (taking down the network of his former employer, Apple Leisure Group, after they fired their U.S. DevOps team to replace them with cheaper overseas hires). In fact, the statute of limitations was a couple of months from expiration. They clearly used this old charge as a pretext to target him. This minor charge was used to hold him. A U.S. Probation Officer then lied under oath to keep him jailed (pre trial) for three years. She claimed he installed a "Linux OS called Spice" to access the "dark web" and hide his activity. This was a technical lie. The software was just a standard SPICE graphics driver for his Ph.D. program. It was not an operating system and could not disable their monitoring. He now faces retaliation from U.S. Probation in Michigan. They have used fraudulent warrants to jail him again. He is currently in a county jail with a severe head injury from his arrest and has been denied a lawyer, a violation of his constitutional rights. This is a documented case of the government twisting technical facts to prosecute a member of your community. I am not asking for money. I am asking you to please help amplify his story. You understand the technical truth and why this fight is so important. We have all the evidence documented, including the court transcripts and fraudulent warrants. You can see everything here: https://rockenhaus.com Thank you for your time and for everything you do for privacy online. Sincerely, Adrienne Rockenhaus https://x.com/adezero

3 4

Re: tor-relays Digest, Vol 176, Issue 1
by code9n＠pm.me 09 Sep '25

09 Sep '25

On Tuesday, September 9th, 2025 at 13:01, tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org <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 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. Re: lower relay through-put: consensus or throttling? > (Georg Koppen) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 12:51:05 +0000 > From: Georg Koppen gk(a)torproject.org > > Subject: [tor-relays] Re: lower relay through-put: consensus or > throttling? > To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > Message-ID: 814fe4cb-affe-464a-91c2-6c0a52711ece(a)torproject.org > > Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; > protocol="application/pgp-signature"; > boundary="------------QI1vquvNwiOUwz7yMKJyMz29" > > Hello! > > code9n via tor-relays: > > > Hi, > > > > For the last 5 months or so my guard / middle relay ( 41D4F82AB54AE5C5FB8D3CD24B4FC84350EFEF03 ) has been moving about 8MB/sec each way which is lower than it had been doing for the 2 years up to that point - it had been averaging around 12MB/sec. > > > > There's been talk on this mailing list of northern European relays getting lower consensus weight recently. (Mine is hosted in the UK). > > > > When my vps was last coming up for annual re-payment I told the admins there (Hostworld) that I was maybe not going to renew my annual subscription and the relay's through-put went up to around 20MB/sec for a while - until I'd renewed. So they do boost / throttle to suit themselves. > > > Could you give us some dates about when you talked to the admins, when > you renewed etc. so we can try to look at the behavior of your relay > during that time and correlate those dates with drops/raises of its > consensus weight? > > > So my question is: Is my last few months lower efficacy likely due to Tor (consensus weight) or throttling by my vps provider? > > > I am not sure yet but I might be able to give you an educated guess > after looking closer at your relay's data with the help of the dates I > asked you about above. > > Georg > > > (It's not my settings in torrc, by the way, they're set way higher than is being used and are unchanged since the earlier, higher, through-put). > > > > Thanks, > > > > Pete > > > > _______________________________________________ > > tor-relays mailing list -- tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to tor-relays-leave(a)lists.torproject.org > > >

1 0

lower relay through-put: consensus or throttling?
by code9n＠pm.me 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

Hi, For the last 5 months or so my guard / middle relay ( 41D4F82AB54AE5C5FB8D3CD24B4FC84350EFEF03 ) has been moving about 8MB/sec each way which is lower than it had been doing for the 2 years up to that point - it had been averaging around 12MB/sec. There's been talk on this mailing list of northern European relays getting lower consensus weight recently. (Mine is hosted in the UK). When my vps was last coming up for annual re-payment I told the admins there (Hostworld) that I was maybe not going to renew my annual subscription and the relay's through-put went up to around 20MB/sec for a while - until I'd renewed. So they do boost / throttle to suit themselves. So my question is: Is my last few months lower efficacy likely due to Tor (consensus weight) or throttling by my vps provider? (It's not my settings in torrc, by the way, they're set way higher than is being used and are unchanged since the earlier, higher, through-put). Thanks, Pete

2 1

Webtunnels
by gerard＠bulger.co.uk 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

I have setup three Webtunnels running for some months, all set to Telegram distribution. Suddenly one of them in Australia has become very popular with 1000 outgoing connections while the two others, EU and USA have just 5-10 outgoing connections at an time. How can encourage a fairer distribution, and my Australian one will start costing + as exceeding data limits of the VPS provider at 6TB a month Gerry

1 0

Urgent: Assistance Regarding BadExit Flag on my Relay
by Dis 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

Hello, I noticed that my exit relay has been flagged as a BadExit on the Tor metrics site. I would really like to maintain a healthy exit node to help the network, as I understand there is often a shortage compared to non-exit relays. I would like to contribute to the Tor network in that way specifically. Could you please let me know what issues led to this flag and what steps I can take to resolve them? I’m fully committed to making the necessary changes. If that means updating configuration, improving stability, or upgrading my VPS resources, I'll do it. Here are my node's details: *Fingerprint:* A00EE720829232514D719A0F4C338C806B9F96F0 *OR Addresses:* 45.135.180.154:9001 *Nickname:*nyaa My contact email is listed in the relay configuration, and I’m emailing you from that address currently. Best regards, Dis

2 1

[bridge operators] Fix required for WebTunnel docker bridges
by gus 28 Aug '25

28 Aug '25

Hello bridge operators, During yesterday's upgrade of our WebTunnel docker image, some bridges stopped working due to an operating system issue[1]. Only WebTunnel operators using our official Docker image are affected. If your bridge is affected and you don’t apply this fix, it will remain non-functional and users will not be able to connect. You need to take action now! ### How to check if your bridge is affected Run the command: `docker ps` If your WebTunnel container is stuck in a restart loop (shows `Restarting (1)` or similar message), then your bridge needs fixing: ``` thetorproject/webtunnel-bridge:latest "/usr/local/bin/star…" 22 hours ago Restarting (1) 21 seconds ago webtunnelBridge5a35b7dd47c6 containrrr/ ``` ### How to fix your WebTunnel docker bridge 1. List your Docker volumes: ``` docker volume list ``` 2. Identify the persistent volume for Tor, then run (adjust the volume name accordingly): ``` docker run --rm -it -v root_webtunnel-tor-state:/var/lib/tor debian chown -R 100 /var/lib/tor ``` 3. Restart your bridge: ``` docker compose up -d ``` If you need help, please reach out to us on irc #tor-relays (irc.oftc.net) or matrix: https://matrix.to/#/#tor-relays:matrix.org. Thank you for running bridges! gus [1] https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/anti-censorship/pluggable-transports/webt… -- The Tor Project Community Team Lead

1 0