tor-relays

tor-relays@lists.torproject.org

38 participants
4819 discussions

Start a nNew thread

How to get rid of 'Family' entries?
by theonionbox＠gmx.com 01 Oct '16

01 Oct '16

2 1

Request for Tor abuse complaints
by Sadia Afroz 29 Sep '16

29 Sep '16

Dear exit operators, Can you please share the abuse complaints you received while running an exit? We are researchers from Univ. of California, Berkeley and Univ. of Massachusetts Amherst are interested in understanding what kind of abuse happens through Tor. Thanks to Moritz Bartl from Torservers.net <http://torservers.net/> we analyzed over 1GB of complaints received over 6 years. Here is our preliminary analysis of the complaints: http://www1.icsi.berkeley.edu/~sadia/tor_abuse_complaints.pdf <http://www1.icsi.berkeley.edu/~sadia/tor_abuse_complaints.pdf> We will appreciate if you can share the abuse complaints you received. It will be valuable for us to better understand the abuse of Tor and to find solutions to reduce abuse. Best, Sadia

9 17

Hide TOR exit on my external IP?
by Volker Mink 29 Sep '16

29 Sep '16

2 2

"Potentially dangerous relay groups"
by nusenu 29 Sep '16

29 Sep '16

pa011(a)web.de wrote: > there is that list of "potentially_dangerous_relaygroups" you published. > Could yo please emphasize a bit more on what brings a relay on that list, apart from incorrect given MyFamily which doesnt seem to be always the case. > I mean I see quite a few well respected names on that list ? to quote from https://github.com/ornetstats/stats (1) "dangerous" in the sense that a tor client might has a chance to use more than one of these relays in a single circuit (2) these relays are aggregated based on contact information (3) if their groupsize is bigger than their effective family size and they are operated in more than one /16 network block they are listed (4) this list might contain false-positives (contact information is not authenticated) Does that answer your question? I probably should also filter entries where two out of guard_prob, middle_prob and exit_prob are 0 since that means that (1) is never the case - iff onionoo is right about these probabilities.

12 23

log message: [WARN] Failing because we have X connections already.
by David S 27 Sep '16

27 Sep '16

greetings! i setup a new tor exit server and am seeing this in the log messages: 18:25:01 [WARN] Failing because we have 1352 connections already. Please read doc/TUNING for guidance. [11430 similar message(s) suppressed in last 21600 seconds] any ideas why? this is happening on a shared VPS, running ubuntu 16.04 and tor v0.2.8.8. i'm starting to think it's some limitation by the VPS provider. uname -a shows a old kernel (possibly centos 6): Linux km14133-25 2.6.32-042stab113.21 #1 SMP Wed Mar 23 11:05:25 MSK 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux i've made sure tor has enough "max open files" available via limits.conf: # cat /proc/$(pgrep tor)/limits|grep "open files" Max open files 65536 65536 files i'm starting to scratch my head. maybe i should do some intense debugging on this box.. cheers, david

3 3

Strange difference between rx and tx traffic
by pa011 27 Sep '16

27 Sep '16

On one of my recently started Exits I do see a rather huge and increasing difference between in and out traffic that I don see on any other Exit so far. The rise doesn’t seem to be linear.. Any explanation for that - or can it just be on the back of a not fixed repetitive warning? Sep 27 06:42:46.000 [warn] eventdns: All nameservers have failed Sep 27 06:42:46.000 [notice] eventdns: Nameserver 8.8.8.8:53 is back up Thanks Paul eth0 / daily day rx | tx | total | avg. rate ------------------------+-------------+-------------+--------------- 11.09.2016 539,96 MiB | 88,50 MiB | 628,47 MiB | 59,59 kbit/s 12.09.2016 1,47 GiB | 1,06 GiB | 2,53 GiB | 245,60 kbit/s 13.09.2016 10,03 GiB | 9,86 GiB | 19,89 GiB | 1,93 Mbit/s 14.09.2016 17,35 GiB | 16,69 GiB | 34,04 GiB | 3,30 Mbit/s 15.09.2016 53,11 GiB | 51,59 GiB | 104,70 GiB | 10,17 Mbit/s 16.09.2016 99,08 GiB | 96,87 GiB | 195,96 GiB | 19,03 Mbit/s 17.09.2016 144,45 GiB | 140,66 GiB | 285,12 GiB | 27,68 Mbit/s 18.09.2016 190,05 GiB | 184,50 GiB | 374,55 GiB | 36,36 Mbit/s 19.09.2016 231,95 GiB | 223,90 GiB | 455,86 GiB | 44,26 Mbit/s 20.09.2016 291,30 GiB | 282,25 GiB | 573,55 GiB | 55,69 Mbit/s 21.09.2016 343,19 GiB | 332,33 GiB | 675,52 GiB | 65,59 Mbit/s 22.09.2016 347,57 GiB | 329,66 GiB | 677,22 GiB | 65,75 Mbit/s 23.09.2016 388,91 GiB | 373,21 GiB | 762,13 GiB | 74,00 Mbit/s 24.09.2016 381,35 GiB | 361,64 GiB | 742,99 GiB | 72,14 Mbit/s 25.09.2016 391,60 GiB | 364,34 GiB | 755,94 GiB | 73,39 Mbit/s 26.09.2016 374,59 GiB | 337,81 GiB | 712,40 GiB | 69,17 Mbit/s 27.09.2016 144,06 GiB | 131,67 GiB | 275,73 GiB | 70,89 Mbit/s ------------------------+-------------+-------------+--------------- estimated 382,03 GiB | 349,18 GiB | 731,21 GiB |

4 5

Re: [tor-relays] [OrNetRadar] niftybunny Digital Ocean 2016-09-22
by nusenu 27 Sep '16

27 Sep '16

Hi Markus, according to your contactinfo observed on the tor network, you run 21 relays, please consider fixing your MyFamily setting, especially because you run non-exit and exits. thanks, nusenu https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ornetstats/stats/master/o/potentially_dan… ornetradar(a)riseup.net wrote: > 2016-09-22 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Up|Ext|JoinTime| IP | CC | ORp | Dirp |Version | ContactInfo | Nickname | eFamlen > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 1 | 0 |14:51:30| 188.166.63.113 | nl | 443 | 80 |0.2.8.7 | niftybunny(a)googlemail.com | cairospinymouse | 1 > 1 | 0 |15:07:01| 95.85.45.159 | nl | 443 | 80 |0.2.8.7 | niftybunny(a)googlemail.com | mullahspinymouse | 1 > 1 | 0 |15:24:30| 138.197.129.153 | ca | 443 | 80 |0.2.8.7 | niftybunny(a)googlemail.com | capespinymouse | 1

2 1

New openssl releases
by Nick Mathewson 26 Sep '16

26 Sep '16

Just a reminder: if you're operating a relay, you should make sure that your operating system is giving you updates for openssl, and you are applying them. There was an update today about bugs in Thursday's OpenSSL releases. For the security advisory, see here: https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20160926.txt best wishes, -- Nick

1 0

Arm connection page shown as empty for one particular node
by Ralph Seichter 25 Sep '16

25 Sep '16

Hello, since updating my nodes to Tor 0.2.8.8, the "connections" page of Arm is not showing connections anymore for one exit node running on Gentoo Linux. On a Debian based exit node and on Gentoo based non-exit nodes things work as expected. The affected exit seems to work fine and bandwidth graphs look OK, only the connection list is unexpectedly shown as empty. I tried all listed "resolving utility" options, but that did not help. Any idea on how I might be able to debug/fix this? -Ralph

3 4

Arm phantom keystroke issue.
by Matt Helps 24 Sep '16

24 Sep '16

Hello. The node we run is in our library and we have a raspberry pi SSH'ed into the node and an LCD displaying the output from Arm. Arm is bugging out on a random basis and appears to be receiving a C keystroke that I believe is the clear log command. I ran the pi with no keyboard and I even used another machine to display the ARM output from the SSH session and it did the same thing. Has anyone else seen this and is there a solution? It's a real bummer because we use this as a learning tool in our library and the pretty graphs of incoming and outgoing traffic really get people interested. When this phantom keystroke happens the graphs stop and somebody has to press N on the keyboard to get the pretty graphs rolling again. This can happen in 2-3 hours or upto 12 hours. See pic here. http://imgur.com/a/wrMhT Cheers, Matt

4 3

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

tor-relays