- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

biggest guard operator apparently left the tor network
by nusenu 03 Mar '16

03 Mar '16

4 4

Network Bandwidth Fine Tuning
by stealth＠nym.mixmin.net 02 Mar '16

02 Mar '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I ran the speedtest on my VPS which gave the results below: root$ speedtest-cli Retrieving speedtest.net configuration... Retrieving speedtest.net server list... Testing from ProServe B.V. (81.4.111.251)... Selecting best server based on latency... Hosted by NFOrce Entertainment B.V. (Amsterdam) [0.00 km]: 4.817 ms Testing download speed........................................ Download: 711.10 Mbit/s Testing upload speed.................................................. Upload: 449.12 Mbit/s My Bandwidth results are averaging around 1.5mbs to 3.0mbs via the Tor Globe Stats page. Can someone tell me how to increase my network bandwidth based on what I am capable of uploading and downloading. I am allocated 2TB of bandwidth per month from my VPS Right now the Advertised Bandwidth is 1.7MB/s and when I scroll down further on the page in the Bandwidth section my "mean written bytes" are 226.15 kb/s and my "mean read bytes" are 227.1 kbs/s I see several sites averaging 50MB/s-60MB/s on the Top Ten Relays list -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (MingW32) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJW0iFwAAoJEH1gNwhiMDZuT60P/jt6YmdvtjR48zhe/fQ2sx4z Uw76B+vjonWqKOaCqyJFBM/buFoXUixTJJ6ksj/KjiVVEdTU4/7WhbwwYTUWGYyc tYhB7nWCxdCNKPy4YMNUG3r+pIaMp1gF+k6wfnHHU+Pqq0H9tTMPNS0Ey44fM0bN BaX2NjuDYpOXDkmKO8xAzKv+KQr9a6pR/DBgC73LniqiZejV3iyMvof7/hypvltq h3QJoFZ8DYjCgk+W0qEWhjCky5RFze1f8ihFsVaM7U8WH6hGcULgXAYZl8Q/MAmN 4jlSogFDSh/e/+0DqVyrkgpyxIPZ43/4y2sn2WYfR8egeocVi6NO9VHtiiygUtcn jOAzaGROGtW6oXNQtGvfeJRwAEsoPmfHF09TJANRB++/KjjSm+cM/ALT1O4b3t5U ZMC5rkoJOUX2jyo3kZpBpobLOW012BnnbGyVV5KNM/BpVkM1sIxOnFhoSfYWij5c QziOvk5wtDXFta2ow12lgruW9wT2moier1WxAxib6u9V05jxckXrpmb3V9yvWBOz SzXh05lh7pEuAfPb2RQXKjGjmkqCweOI2cGhu4B3vDFNKRBhjdXYFZP7/aFe4DRh +J4su48cYVWcnav0c14/27oHxeoYUD8NQV2gBcs7/dCSa1iWHV+PORjBSe+l+IGG R2qL40EDeIgC9TVJqriD =c73J -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

6 9

Stopping the censoring of tor users (via exit bridges / proxies / OpenVPNs)
by grarpamp 29 Feb '16

29 Feb '16

On 2/25/16, blacklight . <pandakaasftw(a)gmail.com> wrote: > hello there! i don't know if this mailing list works but i thought of > giving it a try. > > i was lately reading an article ( > http://www.pcworld.com/article/3037180/security/tor-users-increasingly-trea… > ) > and it was about tor users getting blocked from accessing alot of website. > but after giving this some thought i think i came up with a possible > solution to the problem :there is a thing called bridges, they are used to > access the tor network without your isp knowing that you use tor, but if > you can use those proxies to enter the network, it might also be possible > to exit the network with them. But then we face a second challenge, the > exit nodes have to be configured in such a way that it will relay traffic > to such a bridge, so the exit node owners also need to know the ip of the > bridge. While this doesn't seem difficult to do, it can become difficult. > You see if the bridges are published on a public list(like normal bridges > are) then the blocking sites in question will be able to block those > address too. While this also posses a problem, a possible solution could be > found in something called flashproxies, flashproxies are bridges with a > really short life span, they are created and destroyed fairly swiftly, when > this is done in a rapid pace, they become really hard to block because the > ip changes all the time. So if the exit nodes can be configured to make use > of such flash proxies, then the problem could be solved. I Must admit that > not an expert on this or anything, and it needs alot of more thought, but > it could work. so i was wondering if there are any experts who could help > me with thinking out this subject and maybe confirm if this idea could > work. Skipping that whoever wants to enumerate, test, block, and share lists of the IP of your final hop will find a way to do so... "flashproxies" - are essentially illegal to use as the operator got stupid, and didn't gave permission. - are unstable as were never intentionally provisioned, and the operators get smart when abuse reports and shut them off. - proxy lists are going to be a pain for you to scrape and maintain Options - run your own volunteer network of last hop "proxies" / bridges - buy them from AWS or wherever "meek" style - partner with or plug into already existing networks of those - get tor relays or bridges to do this I previously wrote in archives that exit relays could bind OpenVPN to extra IP's they configure on their exit relay boxes. Tor daemon has nothing to do with those IP so they never appear in tor's easily blacklistable consensus. Users then OpenVPN over tor to those via use of the relay fingerprint to reach vpn terminator IP over relay localhost to save bandwidth, and on out to clearnet. You can OpenVPN to some list of onions if you don't feel like listing the relay fingerprints / extra input IP's on wikis. But it's not going to stop dedicated blacklisters, and onion doubles bandwidth use. However it could also be used by non-exits that for whatever reason didn't want to be a tor-exit but did want to offer exit via some remote third party vpn service. And strictly social sharing on forums etc could happen for distribution. There are already some exits that for various reasons, intentional or other, do not exit from their OR IP. That is a feature that some tor users do now find and use. And relays don't offer OpenVPN yet which would also give users more than just IPv4-TCP exit scheme. Though it is integrated somewhat, I2P has this manual sort of exit offering model with false.i2p and a few other nodes. [Doesn't seem to require daemon dev work, updated subject, continuing thread reply to relays and talk.]

1 0

What do the huge providers have to do within tor circuits?
by torserver＠datakanja.de 29 Feb '16

29 Feb '16

Hello, slowly getting acquainted with running a Tor relay, i am wondering: >From my gathering, tor is - at times - connecting to many instances of akamai CDN services, amazonaws, and other similar services simultaneously. When i say many instances, i mean: a saw a peak exposure of 30 outgoing ports from my server all going to the above 2 alone (as gathered by iftop. I didn't set up snort just yet). This is seen on a NON-Exit-relay and is troubling me: I am aware of Akamai being the premier CDN provider, serving around 30% of internet traffic alone. Their server power, manpower and know-how is huge. And their ability to draw information from any sort of internet traffic is unparalleled. >From my outsider's perspective, they are in the process of building the tools to effectively dismantle the means and purpose of the Tor network at large. That is what is giving me chills, when i watch them acting from inside the circuits. Clearly, they would be able to hide their identity while doing so. And since they aren't, i may be getting something wrong. So that is why i am asking you: Does anyone KNOW, what is going on? NewTorKidOnTheBlock

2 1

default exit notice
by Markus Koch 29 Feb '16

29 Feb '16

Does anyone have the exit notice in japanese? markus

1 0

Any known Tor relay seizures (in Germany)?
by Thomas 29 Feb '16

29 Feb '16

Hello everybody, do you know of any relay seizures of non-exit relays? In the legal FAQ [1] this "risk" is only listed below exit relays. Have there been any of such events in Germany (either exit- or any other nodes)? Would I have to worry about seizures if I run a guard or middle relay in Germany? Regards, Thomas [1] https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq.html.en

4 3

Re: [tor-relays] tor-relays Digest, Vol 61, Issue 43
by stealth＠nym.mixmin.net 29 Feb '16

29 Feb '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 20:21:45 +0000, you wrote: > > > On 28 Feb 2016, at 21:17, stealth(a)nym.mixmin.net wrote: > > > > > Is your OpenSSL compiled optimised for your processor and for the encryption that Tor uses? > > > > > > > I am using the OpenSSL that was compiled for my version of > > Mixmaster as I am running a middle remailer on the same VPS. It is > > OpenSSL: 1.0.1e > > Does Tor log a message when it starts recommending an optimised version of OpenSSL? > There are no references in my notices.log and my .log file is empty. I will temporarily change my log level to debug and see what it shows. > > > How much RAM does your VPS have? > > 512KB > > This is likely to be your issue. 512 MB is not enough for a large relay. > Tor will limit its memory and connections to stay under about 3/4 of the memory you have. > Try 1GB. > > Tim Thanks for advice. Unfortunately upgrading to 1gb is not an option for me. Right now it appears that Tor is not using anywhere near what is available in memory as evidenced by my top command. top - 12:49:36 up 5 days, 20:32, 2 users, load average: 0.05, 0.09, 0.08 Tasks: 70 total, 1 running, 69 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie %Cpu(s): 1.3 us, 0.5 sy, 0.0 ni, 98.2 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si, 0.0 st KiB Mem: 524288 total, 198400 used, 325888 free, 0 buffers KiB Swap: 524288 total, 0 used, 524288 free, 37620 cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 2535 debian-t 20 0 99116 69m 2980 S 3.3 13.5 125:37.86 tor 2422 root 20 0 131m 5108 1080 S 0.3 1.0 5:04.66 fail2ban-server 16014 debian-t 20 0 107m 22m 2516 S 0.3 4.5 6:21.65 arm > > Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) > No response necessary. Thanks for your feedback Tim. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (MingW32) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJW01+NAAoJEH1gNwhiMDZuctQQAKtZM7sQpue4+SpW+o0hdvpO I6XLk9YWHTszJehj5Gk3ik01yBdBiOgD2SJ2rx/cjR4AnRkRyjN6LOt3g/KxnTYI 4FNGo4fygYn4Oeu+HXmtEey3wyCVxWAzsmCXGNO6LhZhupfdmlv/ftcvcGI9VrJQ wNZTW7QeHpUCJLBt9fbh7Drw+MNwLycwHdmV5kvCWWGK1vqzpWOK44Wmk4lz5+lv ung5/HRHpt865SkXp0l/+w+p4qgTSgZ3thXpqtH1mHQPt52n4PKdUDF3Mf1yXYuf JdOTBNThzZ4s4KNj3cdWH4Wf3wPwpIZ5zCZQ2O+osMpTeOSTOZHwPmStNFdM/CuH OtLxJQb5TaVoUjOqzfcetMbx/5JlT1cutDOL5fVCiGSJ7j6q+FekknkrtKxtIKdU gUobGBJ1u8Ei7axaR7rwcL3egouugQYfDHEEFZdYBBW0tgeNx8l6SCEt7IfqEqhW Fmy58WUBs27ei9dnl9I/xq2V9FYBjdN4tpis22wctife/hth8hJWsMTLJYqP7qj9 9jqcJCgs7b7tkQsem72ApWMAgYnXVCMYscnPKTWdCEw9rdiarmArgPfE0AYuo6Lq NIVg4IADmc/X4Y1SUKq/bYW5vkfIhHKA4aoZUZRj2AL6dcLtj5clAL9MnmyKDB7a 1Ie9DF8NEKkTldYHh5IN =o3VV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Tor Process Being Killed on VPS
by Stephen R Guglielmo 29 Feb '16

29 Feb '16

Hello, I have a VPS with 512 MB RAM. I run nothing on it except nginx and a Tor relay. The relay is an entry guard and moves about 20 MB/s. It seems that the kernel is killing the Tor process with "out of memory" errors. Are there any tips for mitigating this? I don't have the money right now to upgrade to the next higher VPS plan which has more RAM, unfortunately. Maybe there's some config settings that I can modify to limit the RAM usage? Or, am I just out of luck? Thanks, Steve

10 12

Re: [tor-relays] tor-relays Digest, Vol 61, Issue 41
by stealth＠nym.mixmin.net 28 Feb '16

28 Feb '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 13:49:20 +0000, you wrote: > > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 12:02:13 +0100 > From: Tim Wilson-Brown - teor <teor2345(a)gmail.com> > To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Network Bandwidth Fine Tuning > Message-ID: <A09CFFB4-5ACA-44B4-B813-7DC0B30A4C06(a)gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > On 28 Feb 2016, at 02:14, stealth(a)nym.mixmin.net wrote: > > > > What processor is on your VPS? Here is my lscpu output: root$ lscpu Architecture: i686 CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit Byte Order: Little Endian CPU(s): 8 Vendor ID: GenuineIntel CPU family: 6 Model: 58 Stepping: 9 CPU MHz: 3300.152 BogoMIPS: 6600.30 Virtualization: VT-x > How fast is it? See above > Does it have AES-NI? I believe so. Here's the output from: grep -o aes /proc/cpuinfo aes aes and here's the output from: grep -ml -o aes /proc/cpuinfo aes > Is your OpenSSL compiled optimised for your processor and for the encryption that Tor uses? > I am using the OpenSSL that was compiled for my version of Mixmaster as I am running a middle remailer on the same VPS. It is OpenSSL: 1.0.1e > How much RAM does your VPS have? 512KB > > Have you read the torservers.net Tor tuning advice? Yes I have made several modifications to my RelayBandwidthRate and RelayBandwidthBurst. I have also modified my AccountingMax number. Here's the pertinent information from my torrc file: RelayBandwidthRate 50 MB # Throttle traffic to 100KB/s (800Kbps) RelayBandwidthBurst 80 MB # But allow bursts up to 200KB/s (1600Kbps) AccountingMax 100 GB > (And similar articles?) Any additional links would be welcomed. > > Tim > > Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (MingW32) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJW00AMAAoJEH1gNwhiMDZu2wYQAImPETHwRvlxrlAclulMlB+n WwPB/fMSjiVwA9Rllb7w8NvSbf2Tu9FmeGoYOUDYTWuq93RsUuQFtVvcw3MXkzBR X/TXAdP9WSDlNiOZajaRNR1hcYQJ0gJqJ9/6oyC1XoDNTK7bcE3FOY5ui10M+fFL rXgM/qBmu+toaqA2vL4DKp3eFYMYDgVmesQLEI6edUvHjK4+itdV9pRwXAvQaFjJ M7We374Siw6izM6cJqXtW3XytUCfIbVyzL+Al93fEJnJDaO5V3kIlHDkjcWJn9ev Ogvg1/zZouwfFFJfC1p29NTsEzy8aF+w3obtq6NWQ0/pzTXJ/sPYIE21EHRIuMJo J2Rk9YPVwp5ckIKH48Eg6jdGjNCI6rs59hhNJfvismvJES+NjgLoqJ+Y59ZnhMjr q4rUssRxyzDFqDdBM60llXfTOh0qEFeHDkeBMfR+F4TJH8SZeEBXW3kyFnG6TH6R D/BoV9ItHi7qXiP9zDIMHTSCz7NNJ210uVdHbMUkMH1He+5bB/auCNRcjXmPwbYg kwbzJlgumSSd4kKufEnvC9KQComniYph90yDr8pOBnCE5E/o8+yVfB7XmTLidNEG Ii/xhSKpdt+E7wQX3ISR2pbJ73tk+FaSd2iPVK0jPWab/zoGqVzZr41VFAWi8n6S tuuLxJ5Lum3gu7EH6M0X =h78g -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Hidden Service on several relays + same .onion
by Pierre L. 27 Feb '16

27 Feb '16

Hey all, Thinking about having fun with hidden-service webhosting on few relays. If I'm not wrong : Host DNS name .onion of a server is stored in the file /var/lib/tor/hidden_service/hostname, there's another file private_key... So my idea is to host the same website on 2 relays with different WAN IP, fingerprint, etc....... But if I copy those 2 files "hostname" + "private_key" on 2 or 3....... relays, will it be ok ? With this set up, if 1 relay is down, the 2nd can be reachable with the same .onion DNS name ? Will this failover method work, or will be it a mess with 2-3 relays with the same .onion name ? Do someone have tried this ? Thx all!

2 2