- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

CentOS 7 Packages
by Alice . 23 Oct '16

23 Oct '16

Hi, I have one relay on CentOS 6 and one on CentOS 7. The one running CentOS 7 hasn't had the 0.2.8.8 update yet and so is still running 0.2.8.7. The one running CentOS 6 has had the latest update. Is there a problem with getting CentOS 7 packages out? How much of a problem is this? Both now and in the future? Thanks Alice

2 1

Recommendation for DUMB COMPUTING devices for Tor Relays
by Dan Michaels 21 Oct '16

21 Oct '16

The Tor Project website recommends various security setups for people running Tor relays. Such as, don't run a web browser on the same machine as your Tor relay, otherwise the browser could get hacked, and then if Tor relays are hacked, it compromises the entire concept of Tor. In the age of FBI mass hacking, the FBI will attempt to hack all Tor relays, and thus, they can trace traffic throughout the entire proxy chain. According to NSA documents, all it takes is "one page load" to infect a browser, because they re-direct you to a fake website that hosts browser exploits, known as QUANTUM INSERT. The FBI will use this to take over all Tor relays that are running web browsers. So, I have a suggestion that I would like Tor Project to recommend. Tor Project needs to tell people.. use DUMB COMPUTING devices for running Tor relays. If your computer gets hacked, it can be deeply exploited in the firmware, such as BIOS, GPU, WiFi chip, etc. There are devices on the market, such as Raspberry Pi, or similar, which have NO WRITABLE FIRMWARE. This is known as being "stateless". It does not "hold state" across reboots. All firmware/drivers are stored on the SD card on the Raspberry Pi, and only loaded in on boot time. No component on the entire Pi holds state. NONE. There will likely be other similar devices. Therefore, it is truly possible to wipe a dumb computing device completely clean. If you try to wipe a regular laptop or desktop, you may have all this deeply infected firmware, such as BIOS, so you keep getting re-infected upon startup. Some people say, once deeply infected, it's near-impossible to clean it out, and you should just throw away your entire laptop and start again. Everyone running a Tor relay should be told to use a DUMB COMPUTING DEVICE. Another advantage is that these devices are often very cheap. Raspberry Pi is very cheap to buy. Other devices may be even cheaper. The instructions should be as follows... (1) Wipe your device clean, i.e. wipe clean the SD card which holds the OS + all firmware/drivers. (2) Then, re-install the OS clean, install Tor, and set up the relay. (3) Tor should be installed from the command line or from a previously-downloaded version on USB stick. Do not install Tor using the web browser, otherwise you could get infected. (4) Do not run anything else on the machine, other than the Tor relay. Using other programs, especially the web browser, could compromise the entire machine. And that's it. Tor Project should send out a message telling all people running Tor relays to follow these instructions. Let me know what you think.

8 7

relay lost most of its consensus weight
by jensm1 19 Oct '16

19 Oct '16

Hi, I just realised that my relay 'itwasntme' lost most of its consensus weight yesterday morning. The relay is only three weeks old, but it was finally picking up some traffic, which now is gone again. What could be the cause for this? Is there a problem with my relay or configuration? Thanks for your help! https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/F46C312E279185364F46EA06C58F792528091…

4 11

assign_to_cpuworker failed. Ignoring.
by Felix 19 Oct '16

19 Oct '16

Thanks for picking up. > It would help us to know if it's just FreeBSD, or just LibreSSL. It's both LibreSSL on FreeBSD 10.1. Same setup worked fine since months through serveral versions of Tor (2.6.x and 2.7.x) and LibreSSL (2.2.x until today). > Maybe mention the bug number on tor-talk, so that poster can provide more details? Might be. -- Felix

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] You dont love me anymore :(
by Tristan 18 Oct '16

18 Oct '16

Like David said, they just had the wrong IP, and it happened to be yours. In a world where computers outnumber people, even a single incorrect digit can have unintended side effects. Glad you got it fixed so quickly! On Oct 18, 2016 1:36 PM, "Markus Koch" <niftybunny(a)googlemail.com> wrote: Just solved but thank you very much for helping me out. It was confusing without end because this server was up for 10 months and high traffic. Markus 2016-10-18 20:30 GMT+02:00 Tristan <supersluether(a)gmail.com>: > According to this page: > https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ReportingBadRelays > > Looks like you need to get in touch work bad-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > > What's strange is that the bad relay team should have contacted you before > making a decision. > > > On Oct 18, 2016 1:23 PM, "Markus Koch" <niftybunny(a)googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> Thank you very much. How do I dispute this? >> >> >> 2016-10-18 20:20 GMT+02:00 Tristan <supersluether(a)gmail.com>: >> > I don't know why or how, but you've got the BadExit flag from moria1: >> > https://consensus-health.torproject.org/consensus-health.html >> > >> > >> > On Oct 18, 2016 1:16 PM, "Markus Koch" <niftybunny(a)googlemail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> This is a guard/middle and should be good ... >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/B771AA877687F88E6F1CA5354756DF 6C8A7B6B24 >> >> >> >> and I have never ever seen this before. >> >> >> >> Markus >> >> >> >> >> >> 2016-10-18 20:13 GMT+02:00 Tristan <supersluether(a)gmail.com>: >> >> > I've seen 404s from time to time, but this is new. Did you get a bad >> >> > relay >> >> > flag somehow??? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Oct 18, 2016 1:12 PM, "Markus Koch" <niftybunny(a)googlemail.com> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> 20:08:18 [WARN] Received http status code 404 ("Not found") from >> >> >> server '86.59.21.38:80' while fetching >> >> >> "/tor/keys/fp-sk/14C131DFC5C6F93646BE72FA1401C02A- >> >> >> 8DF2E8B4-692049A2E7868BE9933107A39B1CE0C7CBF1BF65". >> >> >> 20:06:18 [WARN] Received http status code 404 ("Not found") from >> >> >> server '194.109.206.212:80' while fetching >> >> >> "/tor/keys/fp-sk/14C131DFC5C6F93646BE72FA1401- >> >> >> C02A8DF2E8B4-692049A2E7868BE9933107A39B1CE0C7CBF1BF65". >> >> >> 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in >> >> >> this range.") response from dirserver '171.25.193.9:443'. Please >> >> >> correct. >> >> >> 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in >> >> >> this range.") response from dirserver '154.35.175.225:80'. Please >> >> >> correct. >> >> >> 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in >> >> >> this range.") response from dirserver '131.188.40.189:80'. Please >> >> >> correct. >> >> >> 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in >> >> >> this range.") response from dirserver '86.59.21.38:80'. Please >> >> >> correct. >> >> >> >> >> >> This is my niftypika server. This is animal abuse! Seriously, WTF is >> >> >> going wrong? >> >> >> >> >> >> Markus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> tor-relays mailing list >> >> >> tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> >> >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > tor-relays mailing list >> >> > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> >> > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> tor-relays mailing list >> >> tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > tor-relays mailing list >> > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> tor-relays mailing list >> tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

2 1

You dont love me anymore :(
by Markus Koch 18 Oct '16

18 Oct '16

20:08:18 [WARN] Received http status code 404 ("Not found") from server '86.59.21.38:80' while fetching "/tor/keys/fp-sk/14C131DFC5C6F93646BE72FA1401C02A- 8DF2E8B4-692049A2E7868BE9933107A39B1CE0C7CBF1BF65". 20:06:18 [WARN] Received http status code 404 ("Not found") from server '194.109.206.212:80' while fetching "/tor/keys/fp-sk/14C131DFC5C6F93646BE72FA1401- C02A8DF2E8B4-692049A2E7868BE9933107A39B1CE0C7CBF1BF65". 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '171.25.193.9:443'. Please correct. 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '154.35.175.225:80'. Please correct. 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '131.188.40.189:80'. Please correct. 20:05:18 [WARN] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '86.59.21.38:80'. Please correct. This is my niftypika server. This is animal abuse! Seriously, WTF is going wrong? Markus

4 9

Why do 40% of Tor exits uses 8.8.8.8 for DNS resolving ?
by Toralf Förster 18 Oct '16

18 Oct '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Reading [1] I do wonder about that. Why do Tor exit relay operators avoid installing a local resolver - or at least simple a cache as shown in [2] ? Adding different nameserver= lines to /etc/resolv.conf than 8.8.8.8 shouldn't be a big thing, or ? [1] https://nymity.ch/tor-dns/tor-dns.pdf [2] https://zwiebeltoralf.de/torserver.html - -- Toralf PGP: C4EACDDE 0076E94E, OTR: 420E74C8 30246EE7 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHYEAREIAB4FAlgDW9QXHHRvcmFsZi5mb2Vyc3RlckBnbXguZGUACgkQxOrN3gB2 6U7l0AD9GolbdbnFmmDVACsdosxGC+bkD7czticuu0jTSQ5ObhYA/3aq74/N23bp D0mOLzfUmmDpiI2KXOSLvG/n8vrAgYlV =y46I -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

11 25

Re: [tor-relays] Smallest, cheapest, lightest computer for tor relay
by Neel Chauhan 18 Oct '16

18 Oct '16

>Yes it does make a real big difference. Get the Pi 3, the 1st Pi is an order of magnitude slower. If you don't want to spend your money on a RPI 3, you can also look at a used RPI 2. If you are willing to have a computer that is a bit larger, you can also use a smaller desktop PC, like a Mac Mini, or a SFF Dell or HP. I have a Raspberry Pi 2, but use a homebuilt Pentium 4 desktop on a 60/25 cable connection (Optimum Online), and a Dell Optiplex 755 (Core 2 Duo) on a 50/50 FTTH connection (Verizon FiOS). I don't use the RPI because I want my Tor nodes to use FreeBSD instead of Linux, and am not sure if RPI has the best FreeBSD support (I'm even a FreeBSD contributor, but my laptop which I typed this from unfortunately runs Arch). The disadvantage of the PC approach is space and higher power consumption, but the advantage is that you can use *BSD and Windows, and can possibly take advantage of faster speeds. But if you are fine with Linux, and, the RPI 2/3 is a good choice. There are also other SBC computers like the BeagleBone. SBC computers are great if they have ADSL/Cable, but if they have fiber to the home (Verizon FiOS, Google Fiber, etc.), a used desktop (or a higher end SBC) may be better (in my opinion) as they usually have a faster upstream and a desktop may take better advantage of the speed. My atlas entries are below (for the two nodes from my two homes, not my exits): https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/AED76373324653A0522DF30550BA31902B2CF… https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/D5B8C38539C509380767D4DE20DE84CF84EE8… Thanks, Neel Chauhan === https://www.neelc.org/

7 8

Tor Relay Operators Meetup at hack.lu - 19.10. 16:00
by Tyler Durden 17 Oct '16

17 Oct '16

Hi We are present at this years hack.lu together with a booth with the Chaos Computer Club Luxembourg. Should you guys happen to be around just come by and talk to us. ( We do have Mate, Mate Schnapps and Flora Power :P ) Tor Relay Operators Meet-Up Where: FVDE & C3L booth at the main hall Date: 19th of October 2016 Time: 16h00 Greetings -- Sam Grüneisen - President Frënn vun der Ënn A.S.B.L. enn.lu

1 0

I think I my relay is broken
by Tamara West 17 Oct '16

17 Oct '16

SocksPort 0 RunAsDaemon 1 ORPort 443 Nickname saverig ContactInfo sinister(dot)hama(at)googlemail(dot)com [tor-relay.co] DirPort 80 ExitPolicy reject *:* DisableDebuggerAttachment 0 ControlPort 9051 CookieAuthentication 1 There is no IP listed unless I located the incorrect file. /etc/tor/torrc 207.172.253.216 is my public address I do have the port forwarded. The whole point was so that anyone who couldn't reach tor normally and had to use 443, 80 could do so with my setup. I've noticed some weirdness with RCN though. Some IPs block and allow access differently and as far as I can tell no one seems to know why. I already had an issue with my streaming box not seeing my server. Also I know I've had a site hosted on my computer before. Without really knowing why getting a new IP resolved the issue.

1 0