- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Relay measured fine by moria1 but 0/26 measurements at maatuska (all stream errors)
by Beacon Tor Node 22 Jul '26

22 Jul '26

Hi all, I'm running an exit relay and seeing a strange discrepancy between bandwidth authorities. Some measure my relay without any problem, while others fail every single attempt with stream errors. Relay: beacon Fingerprint: 85082CD18CF6C931968105DFFFDDE82EBC4C9AF8 Observations from 2026-07-22: moria1 (13:47 UTC) — success=3/3, error_stream=0, error_circ=0, bw=6400 tor26 (06:23 UTC) — success=1/3, error_stream=0, error_circ=2, bw=1 maatuska (14:21 UTC) — success=0/26, error_stream=26, error_circ=0, unmeasured=1, vote=0 longclaw (09:32 UTC) — success=0/7, error_stream=7, error_circ=0, unmeasured=1, vote=0 gabelmoo — no data for this relay What stands out: error_circ is 0 at both maatuska and longclaw, so circuits build fine. The failures happen at the stream stage, and they happen every single time. Meanwhile moria1 measures the same relay flawlessly on the same day. Configuration: ExitRelay 1, ReducedExitPolicy 1, IPv6Exit 1, RelayBandwidthRate 37 MBytes, RelayBandwidthBurst 42 MBytes What I have checked locally, without finding anything: - DNS: local Unbound resolver, 0 serverfailed, 0 refused, 0 truncated, 213 timeouts out of 4920 queries (~4%) - IPv6: globally routable, verified from outside - MTU: full 1500 bytes pass unfragmented on both v4 and v6, no packet loss, ~6ms latency - TCP: ListenOverflows 0, ListenDrops 0, PruneCalled 0, conntrack 710/65536 - File descriptors: 65536 limit, ~620 active connections - OOM: tor_relay_load_oom_bytes_total 0 across all subsystems - Onionskins: 0 dropped - Firewall: outbound policy ACCEPT, nothing blocked - Tor logs: no warnings or errors over the past several days - System clock: synchronized via NTP The relay is relatively young (relay_in_recent_consensus_count between 28 and 85 depending on the authority), so I'm also open to the possibility that this simply resolves itself with more measurement attempts over time. Thanks, beacon

1 0

relayor v26.2.0 is released - Goodbye "MyFamily"
by nusenu 22 Jul '26

22 Jul '26

Hi, relayor v26.2.0 is released. https://github.com/nusenu/ansible-relayor/releases/tag/v26.2.0 This release marks the end of "MyFamily" support in relayor. Since all supported tor versions support the Happy Family design there is no reason to continue supporting the old "MyFamily" method to declare relay families. relayor is an ansible role that helps you with automating tor relay operations https://github.com/nusenu/ansible-relayor#main-benefits-for-a-tor-relay-ope… Changes since v26.1.0: - remove MyFamily support: The last tor version that required MyFamily (0.4.8.x) in addition to Happy Family support reached end-of-life on 2026-06-01 - use absolute filter name to fix error "No filter named 'ipaddr'" kind regards, nusenu -- https://nusenu.github.io

7 9

If the IPv6 ORPort can't be reached, will clients/relays fall back to the IPv4 ORPort?
by forest-relay-contact＠cryptolab.net 21 Jul '26

21 Jul '26

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Hello. If a client or relay with IPv6 attempts to connect to a relay's IPv6 ORPort and receives no response, will it fall back to IPv4 or will it consider the relay unreachable? Assume that the directory authorities are able to reach the v6 ORPort. Is the behavior different if there is an explicit error returned, e.g. RST or an ICMPv6 no route to host? Regards, forest -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYKAB0WIQQtr8ZXhq/o01Qf/pow+TRLM+X4xgUCal6ZDgAKCRAw+TRLM+X4 xgM7AP9xJhuSw8vYilYYbtzscuPLZk8BMY58gqPL2gocHYy/9wEAnduiOSjAeG6c 2yzboG7z5+HCV56tjIwXhuUTrprCmAY= =CQEB -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 7

adaption of a DDoS prevention solution
by Toralf Förster 21 Jul '26

21 Jul '26

Recent DDoS attacks caused me to update the DDoS solution [1] and to roll it out to Tor instances using [2]. The metrics below shows the effect for the (highly overloaded vCPU before), the throughput and the amount of protocol violations of a tiny Tor cloud instance: Another example is Tor instance at a bare metal server, attacked between 12 and 13 UTC (no Tor metrics during that time) and again after 16 UTC. The new rule set was developed between 14 and 15, and fully applies after a reboot at 15:20: The graph below shows that the ipset (which holds malicious ip addresses to be blocked) was not updated at the first attack. But with the new rule set in place it was updated soon at the 2nd attack. The yellow line in the 2nd graph shows the portion of the change. And finally the DOS Tor metric for this instance indicates that the Tor process has much less DOS to handle than before: I'm still fine tuning the solution. [1] https://github.com/toralf/torutils#the-rule-set [2] https://github.com/toralf/tor-relays -- Toralf

2 6

Abnormal Firewall-States since 0.4.9.10
by ProSecureRelays 19 Jul '26

19 Jul '26

Hi there, I want to report abnormal Firewall States since the update. Since a week or two, (I believe with 0.4.9.10) tor started to excessively use Firewall-States, far beyond what I observed beforehand. In normal operation, I observed about 20k - 45k Firewall States for the relay. Yesterday, before I installed the update, I had 190k Firewall States, related to Tor Relay Traffic. The days before it cycled from 120 - 145k States. Also far more than normal. Today, I see excessive Errors (> 20 Errors/Sek) in my Firewall, relating to use of invalid Firewall States (pf: BAD State..) - all are Tor Related Connections. It would be nice if anyone could have a look, if your connections increased also that much. I also wonder if this might be a type of attack? Regardless of the odd connections, the relay is running well, no CPU peaks and normal memory usage (602MB). Best regards and have a nice weekend! Joker

4 5

adaption of a DDoS prevention solution (now with images)
by Toralf Förster 18 Jul '26

18 Jul '26

Recent DDoS attacks caused me to update the DDoS solution [1] and to roll it out to Tor instances using [2]. The metrics below shows the effect for the (highly overloaded vCPU before), the throughput and the amount of protocol violations of a tiny Tor cloud instance: Another example is Tor instance at a bare metal server, attacked between 12 and 13 UTC (no Tor metrics during that time) and again after 16 UTC. The new rule set was developed between 14 and 15, and fully applies after a reboot at 15:20: The graph below shows that the ipset (which holds malicious ip addresses to be blocked) was not updated at 12 UTC. But with the new rule set in place it was updated soon at 16 UTCk. The green line here is the (now first half) of the changed rule whilst the yellow line reflects the addition for that rule. And finally a graph of the DOS Tor metric for this instance which shows that the Tor process has much less DOS to handle than before: I'm still fine tuning the solution. [1] https://github.com/toralf/torutils#the-rule-set [2] https://github.com/toralf/tor-relays -- Toralf

1 0

5 to 10 times more outgoing than incoming traffic
by code9n＠pm.me 18 Jul '26

18 Jul '26

Hi, re. guard / middle relay : 6AD7A3E682FE74BDFE34AC0F0D17714480BA773B Until yesterday I was getting a normal balance of about 25MB coming in and going out. But today I'm getting around 10MB incoming and averaging about 75MB going out. Any idea what's going on and how to fix it assuming a fix is necessary? Thanks.

1 0

Onionoo shows family_cert but no family_ids
by rE-Bo0t.bx1 17 Jul '26

17 Jul '26

I’m seeing an Onionoo issue with one relay and wanted to check if others have seen it too. Relay: * Nickname: ShinobiHouou * Fingerprint: 7E87EC2F20A371E32E6672A6D04B55471BC5D369 * Tor: 0.4.9.11 * FamilyId: K620zs7GW3AqmEOzvkGYJE/D5HsWrOrmDlckrhxbrXE The relay has been online since 2026-07-11. Onionoo updates last_seen normally and the relay is reachable on IPv4/IPv6. The rest of my Shinobi relay family shows family_ids in Onionoo. This is the only one missing it, out of 15 relays. Onionoo’s full details document includes family_cert: |curl "https://onionoo.torproject.org/details?lookup=7E87EC2F20A371E32E6672A6D04B5…" | jq| Relevant part: |"family_cert": "AQwAB5K5AfR4C6AIeIu0XUQn5Td+xHll8Hon3vGRqcKUZIfD6YFbAQAgBAArrbTO..."| But this still returns no family_ids: |curl "https://onionoo.torproject.org/details?lookup=7E87EC2F20A371E32E6672A6D04B5…" | jq| Output: | { "relays": [ {} ] }| 1AEO also detects the relay as Happy Families, but keeps it under “Pending Onionoo refresh”. https://metrics.1aeo.com/relay/7E87EC2F20A371E32E6672A6D04B55471BC5D369/ So it looks like Onionoo sees family_cert, but does not derive/expose family_ids for this relay. I found what looks like a similar earlier tor-relays/forum thread: https://forum.torproject.org/t/tor-relays-onionoo-relays-with-family-cert-b… Is this expected/known behavior, or is there a way to debug why family_ids is absent even though family_cert is present in Onionoo? Any hints or sanity checks would be appreciated. rE-Bo0t.bx1 https://relays.brokenbotnet.com

1 1

Experiences running a Tor exit relay in Serbia (or with MAXKO)?
by Beacon Tor Node 17 Jul '26

17 Jul '26

Hello everyone, I'm planning to run my first Tor exit relay and I'm looking at hosting it in an underrepresented location. According to Tor Metrics there are currently no exit relays in Serbia at all, so I'm considering a Serbian location with the provider MAXKO (a Croatia-based company, AS211619). Before I commit, I'd be grateful for any experience or advice on two points: - Has anyone run a Tor exit relay hosted in Serbia? Any legal or practical issues to be aware of, given Serbia is outside the EU (no "mere conduit" protection)? - Does anyone have experience with MAXKO as an exit-friendly host, in particular how they handle abuse complaints and whether their Serbian location runs under a separate AS? I plan to run a reduced exit policy, a proper abuse contact and a notice page on port 80. Thanks a lot for any input! Best regards

2 1

Tor Metrics
by wxw＠safe-mail.net 13 Jul '26

13 Jul '26

Hi I have operated many relays over the years. I only started using tor metrics to check up on my relays for maybe 3-5 years. Over the last year I have noticed that my uptime has reset randomly sometimes every couple of days sometimes every couple of weeks. When I first started they were up for months at a time. Now I know what you may be thinking that my relays are just going down for whatever reason. Well that's not the case as I do monitor them independently also. The thing is they all go out and reset the uptime at exactly the same time. Now I use 3 separate vps providers for 17 middle relays. When I go to check them they all are showing the exact same new uptime. Can you help me to understand this. Thanks a lot for all that you do. Regards Phil (search masstor relays)

3 2