- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Location of private key on Android?
by Christian Andersen 21 Jan '16

21 Jan '16

Hey guys, I'm running Orbot as a relay on my otherwise unused mobile. It works great! https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/B47A49120A51D28A6191BE9A67F102AA96F5F… But in case I ever need to move the relay to a real computer, or start using the mobile, I'll need the private key, but I can't seem to find it. My phone is Sony Xperia ZR, unrooted, running Android 5.1.1, 10.7.A.0.228 (possibly a Sony version number). Orbot is version 15.1.0-RC-2 (Tor 0.2.7.5-020120160125) I just updated from Google Play Store - I realize the version above (from the About-menu) doesn't reflect the Atlas-info. I don't know why. Root\Android\data shows no folders related to Orbot, I have unchecked "Hide system files" in the file managers I downloaded from Google Play store. - File Manager from ZenUI - File Manager from SAND STUDIO and - File Commander - File Manager from MobiSystems - - Which requires Premium to view hidden files(!). Any help is appreciated. Maybe i just need a non-sucky file manager? C A

1 0

arm /flags gives unknown
by Dr. Who 21 Jan '16

21 Jan '16

Since some months I monitored my tor instance via this one liner: echo "/info" | /usr/bin/arm -p | /bin/grep flags but it seems after updating to 0.2.7.6 it only gives my unknown as result. Has something changed the communication between tor and arm? Even manually I can only get this answer: >>> /info TeamTardis (330CD3DB6AD266DC70CDB512B036957D03D9BC59) address: 185.100.84.212:443 (ro) published: 06:28:21 2016-01-20 os: Linux version: 0.2.7.6 flags: unknown exit policy: reject 1-65535 contact: Team Tardis <drwho(a)posteo.is>

5 5

relays possible sybil
by tor-server-creator＠use.startmail.com 20 Jan '16

20 Jan '16

hi, just wondering whats the matter with these 66+ relays "cloudvps" ... guess they get vote, should we discard some iprages? thanks

3 3

Running a relay, only, in win7
by je suis 19 Jan '16

19 Jan '16

Hello all I'm sorry if I'm writing to the wrong list. Until recently and since some months back, I ran a tor relay under Linux, during daytime (only have my laptop), with 2.5/5MBps speed. Not much, it took an hour or two to really start, but it worked, I hope it helped a bit. Now I find I need to spend time in win7 more and I'd like to keep on running a relay, but I can't seem to get tor to work. Since the FAQ only says what Linux users should do and all my searches turned out to have Vidalia involved, I don't know how to make this work, so I'm asking for help: is there a place where I can read, or could you tell me what I need to do to run a relay in win7? Thank you in advance, Vlad

4 6

atlas not showing 3 days and 1 week graphs
by krishna e bera 19 Jan '16

19 Jan '16

Is atlas.torproject.org broken or changed? It seems to show only 1 month and longer graphs now.

5 6

Re: [tor-relays] Revised Opt-In Trial: Fallback Directory Mirrors
by starlight.2016q1＠binnacle.cx 19 Jan '16

19 Jan '16

I'd guess a bug in the version update script. At 19:20 1/12/2016 +0100, Aeris wrote: >> Are you *absoultely* certain that the config >> was not fiddled with at the time of this event? > >After grepping some logs, seems 13/12 was the day of a Tor >upgrade : > >2015-12-13 10:47:31 upgrade tor:amd64 0.2.7.5-1~d80.jessie+1 0.2.7.6-1~d80.jessie+1 >2015-12-13 10:48:39 configure tor:amd64 0.2.7.6-1~d80.jessie+1 > >Timing is good compare to the 10:48:46 of the consensus ! > >But I donât remember a config change after that, >perhaps only on /usr/share/tor/tor-service-defaults-torrc >or on a default config param change ? > >And perhaps the Tor reboot cause the DirPort to >be temporarily disabled (seems not human, only >2s duration) ? > >Regards, >-- >Aeris

2 4

Re: [tor-relays] Opt-In Trial: Fallback Directory Mirrors
by starlight.2015q3＠binnacle.cx 18 Jan '16

18 Jan '16

Relay 'Binnacle' experienced outages due to a loose fiber-option junction in the overhead wires that has been repaired. I believe it would make the list if not for this and do not foresee further trouble. Has a static IP and another Verizon FiOS relay qualifies, a positive reflection on the network. Available if desired. Can configure IPv6 on the HE tunnel here if helpful. $ python updateFallbackDirs.py DEBUG:root:Failed to get an ipv6 address for 4F0DB7E687FC7C0AE55C8F243DA8B0EB27FBF1F2. DEBUG:root:Adding uptime 4F0DB7E687FC7C0AE55C8F243DA8B0EB27FBF1F2. DEBUG:root:4F0DB7E687FC7C0AE55C8F243DA8B0EB27FBF1F2 not a candidate: guard avg too low (0.910189) { "dir_address":"108.53.208.157:80", "or_addresses":["108.53.208.157:443"], "contact":"starlight dot YYYYqQ at binnacle dot cx", "consensus_weight":17500, "fingerprint":"4F0DB7E687FC7C0AE55C8F243DA8B0EB27FBF1F2", "recommended_version":true, "nickname":"Binnacle", "last_changed_address_or_port":"2015-06-12 18:00:00" }

3 3

Revised Opt-In Trial: Fallback Directory Mirrors
by Tim Wilson-Brown - teor 18 Jan '16

18 Jan '16

Hi all, Nick sent an email in December[0] asking relay operators to opt-in as a fallback directory mirror. This will help tor clients reach the tor network, and reduce the load on directory authorities.[1] We will keep the opt-ins and opt-outs submitted so far - no need to opt-in or opt-out again! If you run an under-utilised exit, we encourage you to opt-in as a fallback directory. We've also fixed a major bug that excluded some relays from the list. (Thanks starlight!) Here's the latest list of fallback directory candidates: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/15775/fallback_d… <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/15775/fallback_d…> This list was generated a few minutes ago from scripts/maint/updateFallbackDirs.py in my branch fallback-17887-17888-18035 on [2]. (This branch has some bug fixes compared to what's in master.) Tim [0]: https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2015-December/008361.html <https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2015-December/008361.html> [1]: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/FallbackDirectoryMirrors <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/FallbackDirectoryMirrors> [2]: https://github.com/teor2345/tor.git <https://github.com/teor2345/tor.git> Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP 968F094B teor at blah dot im OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F

6 13

Opt-In Trial: Fallback Directory Mirrors
by Felix 17 Jan '16

17 Jan '16

Hi I'm happy to bring in the relay Doedel22 '8FA37B93397015B2BC5A525C908485260BE9F422'. Best regards, Felix

3 2

Do less-secure pluggable transports on bridges render more-secure types useless?
by Rick Huebner 17 Jan '16

17 Jan '16

I've read that obfs4 and scramblesuit are very resistant ("immune" is so optimistic) to such things as active probes performed by the Great Firewall, which can quickly probe and detect older transports (and of course vanilla ORports), plus the older transports and ORports are subject to relatively quick detection through deep packet inspection once a user connects from there. Does it make sense to offer older more vulnerable transports along with newer more secure ones? If my bridge offers both obfs3 and obfs4, does that just mean that as soon as someone in China uses obfs3 it's detected and my IP address is blocked, making the obfs4 port unusable from there as well even though it would have avoided detection on its own? More fundamentally, does the bridge address server also publish vanilla ORports for those bridges which offer obfs4, and does a Chinese user accessing my bridge's ORport doom my entire bridge to immediate blockage from there? I can't imagine the GFW would be so kind as to only block the ORport's specific port number, I assume it blocks the entire bridge IP address, making all transports useless if any single one of them is detected. Would it be better to only offer obfs4 to avoid detection and blockage via older transports?

2 2