- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Rate setting in tor
by r1610091651 08 Sep '17

08 Sep '17

Hi I've a question regarding the rate setting in torrc and tor honoring it. I've set up a tor relay with following rate settings: RelayBandwidthRate 2048 KBytes RelayBandwidthBurst 2048 KBytes But using arm, I'm seeing that tor is not honoring these settings, with bursts frequently exceeding the value. The average rate control seems to be working fine though. [image: image.png] What am I missing? I'm running 0.3.0.10 on Linux. Thanks

6 7

Force OpenSSL AES-NI usage on a VPS without the AES CPU flag passthrough
by Roman Mamedov 06 Sep '17

06 Sep '17

Hello, Today I found that it is possible to force OpenSSL enable the use of CPU AES acceleration even if it doesn't detect the "aes" CPU flag. Many VPS hosts configure their hypervisors in a way that does not have the flag passed through into VPSes, even though all their host nodes surely have CPUs with support for AES-NI. In my experience hosts have not been forthcoming in reconfiguring their systems to include that flag passthrough. But it turns out we can force OpenSSL to believe AES is supported, even if the CPU does not report it. This can be done with the "OPENSSL_ia32cap" environment variable. Searching around, all I found was scenarios to use it for disabling AES-NI (for testing), e.g.: https://mjanja.ch/2013/11/disabling-aes-ni-on-linux-openssl/ I believe the syntax used there applies "xor" over the real flag values, e.g. OPENSSL_ia32cap="~0x200000200000000" to disable AES. But what if you need to force-enable it. Turns out the syntax working for that is simply: OPENSSL_ia32cap="+0x200000200000000" Let's take one VPS box with the aforementioned problem. # cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 13 model name : QEMU Virtual CPU version 1.5.3 stepping : 3 microcode : 0x1 cpu MHz : 1695.729 cache size : 4096 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 1 core id : 0 cpu cores : 1 apicid : 0 initial apicid : 0 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 4 wp : yes flags : fpu de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 syscall nx lm rep_good nopl eagerfpu pni cx16 hypervisor lahf_lm bugs : bogomips : 3391.45 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 46 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: As you can see "aes" is not present. Testing OpenSSL speed in the default configuration. # openssl speed -elapsed -evp aes-128-gcm ... type 16 bytes 64 bytes 256 bytes 1024 bytes 8192 bytes 16384 bytes aes-128-gcm 32332.17k 40365.80k 42265.77k 42376.19k 43196.42k 43401.22k And now we force AES hardware acceleration usage: # OPENSSL_ia32cap="+0x200000200000000" openssl speed -elapsed -evp aes-128-gcm ... type 16 bytes 64 bytes 256 bytes 1024 bytes 8192 bytes 16384 bytes aes-128-gcm 59047.07k 104467.39k 141712.21k 151093.93k 158321.32k 156827.65k Almost 4 times faster! For Tor this leads to higher bandwidth utilization and lower CPU usage (which will actually make your VPS host happier :) But how to apply that to Tor? Well, for some initial testing I just chose to add the following line to /etc/init.d/tor (not using systemd here), right after "#! /bin/bash": export OPENSSL_ia32cap="+0x200000200000000" (but this will get overwritten and removed by the next Tor version upgrade). Seems to work just fine, my CPU usage is half of what it was before, at similar bandwidth levels. So now it has headroom to ramp up further. A word of caution, firstly always test as shown above to verify that it works. I believe if the underlying CPU actually doesn't support AES, all programs trying to use it, including "openssl speed", will crash outright, with an incorrect instruction error, or somesuch. So there is no risk to jeopardize encryption strength or security of Tor. Also even if it works now, it may stop working down the line if the host migrates your VPS to a node with older CPU, one which doesn't support AES. But migrations of customers between do not happen very often, and in fact all CPUs used today in a hosting environment should support AES, as that's been implemented in server (and even desktop) CPUs a very very long time ago. (Apologies for double-post, I realized tor-relays should have been the better place to post). -- With respect, Roman

5 4

Re: [tor-relays] Any IP allocations available out there?
by Paul Templeton 04 Sep '17

04 Sep '17

> If you're interested in becoming your own ISP (obtaining your own ASN, > IPv6 and IPv4 scopes), you'll need to apply via APNIC, as I did in the > US with ARIN. Here is an example: Would if I could - but here in AU you have to log all metadata for two years if you are an ISP. I either listen to what others have stated and host overseas or host overseas... I might be able to get a 20/20Mbs fibre for AU$250 - Just waiting to find out if they have data caps or not. Thanx all for your input. Paul PS - whats more important - More bandwidth for exit nodes or a faster presence in AU???

6 11

Tor-arm failure
by Arisbe 03 Sep '17

03 Sep '17

Hello people, I'm not a python programmer so I need some help with a problem. I have a number of Tor nodes and some bridges. Occasionally, when I install tor_arm I get a divide by zero message as follows: Exception in thread Thread-69: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/python2.7/threading.py", line 801, in __bootstrap_inner selt.run() File "/usr/share/arm/util/sysTools.py", line 517, in runnewValues["cpuAvg"] = total CpuTime / uptime ZeroDivisionError: integer division or modulo by zero Exception in thread Thread-70 ...... I'm running debian jessie in this most recent example. 2 G memory, 20 G hdd. This is a bridge with only some daily use but typically 10-12 circuits. Does someone have experience debugging this problem? Thanks!

5 10

Re: [tor-relays] DIR Port. and NATO
by Dr Gerard Bulger 30 Aug '17

30 Aug '17

Roger, thank for the answer. Reason of no DIR port will be Accounting Max Enabled, although every unlikely I would reach the max I set, I use those settings to give me instant total usage within ARM While searching for some suitable wording if I ever get abuse complaints again, and searching the legal risks within Europe of Exits, I was rather surprised found NATO published a detailed appraisal of Tor. I thought it rather good, not very technical, and fair although it may be getting out of date. https://ccdcoe.org/sites/default/files/multimedia/pdf/TOR_Anonymity_Network… Gerry -----Original Message----- From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-bounces@lists.torproject.org] On Behalf Of Roger Dingledine Sent: 30 August 2017 16:36 To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Subject: Re: [tor-relays] DIR Port On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 01:39:34PM +0100, Dr Gerard Bulger wrote: > DIR port on my relay and mini exit as being there on Atlas. > > The DIR port is open, indeed the DirPortFrontPage can be seen. > > Bandwidth is ???fast??? > > The exit is very limited in scope to avoid abuse claims, so few ports forwarded such as 443, but not 80. Is that the reason not showing? Check out your logs as the relay starts. Look for a log message like log_notice(LD_DIR, "Not advertising Dir%s (Reason: %s)", dir_port ? "Port" : "ectory Service support", reason); Common reasons include "AccountingMax enabled" and "BandwidthRate under 50KB". In general, it's fine for Tor to decide not to advertise your DirPort. Everything else is still working fine. Thanks for running a relay! --Roger _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

1 0

DIR Port
by Dr Gerard Bulger 30 Aug '17

30 Aug '17

DIR port on my relay and mini exit as being there on Atlas. The DIR port is open, indeed the DirPortFrontPage can be seen. Bandwidth is “fast” The exit is very limited in scope to avoid abuse claims, so few ports forwarded such as 443, but not 80. Is that the reason not showing? Gerry

2 1

Tor relay making normal internet unusable
by W Howard 30 Aug '17

30 Aug '17

Dear Group, I have some spare bandwidth and want to run an exit relay buy when I do the normal internet is so slow and I have to fill out so many captcha that it makes it unusable! Any ideas why? I think google etc block by default tor exit nodes. I was thinking about spinning up a vm and running tor on that. When I run as a bridge I don't see much traffic. Any ideas? Cheers!

4 5

IP Forwarding ON - on the host with tor relay - any risk ?
by Muppet96 28 Aug '17

28 Aug '17

Hi, on the one of my servers where tor relay is running I would like to configure openvpn server. In that case IP Forwarding needs to be enabled (ubuntu). Is there any security risk if this feature will be enabled on the tor-relay host ? Thanks Muppet96 Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.

2 1

Fallback directory mirror DFRI7 is dead
by Linus Nordberg 25 Aug '17

25 Aug '17

Hi teor, Fallback directory mirror DFRI7 [0] is down, due to multiple disk krashes, since about 30h and will not come alive with the same key. [0] 171.25.193.131:80 orport=443 id=79861CF8522FC637EF046F7688F5289E49D94576 A new DFRI7 will appear on the same address and port within a couple of days. Should I simply update fallback_dirs.inc?

3 3

Tor Install Error
by Kurt Besig 24 Aug '17

24 Aug '17

While using apt-get to update my tor relay to a 'recommended' version I keep encountering this error: W: An error occurred during the signature verification. The repository is not updated and the previous index files will be used. GPG error: http://deb.torproject.org trusty InRelease: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY 74A941BA219EC810 W: Failed to fetch http://deb.torproject.org/torproject.org/dists/trusty/InRelease I've read several approaches to remedying this error, however I'm wondering what would be the 'most widely accepted as correct' method of dealing with the error? Thanks

2 1