- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

RPM upgrade issue.
by Sascha Siekmann 01 Jan '15

01 Jan '15

Hello, Happy New Year, everone! I've been chasing this down here for the last hour or so and I thought I might as well share it since others might also experience it. I am running https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/plutonium After running yum update this lead to a different fingerprint being generated for the same host. Nov 29 01:09:27 Installed: tor-0.2.5.10-tor.2.rh6_5.i686 Dec 29 19:21:07 Installed: torsocks-2.0.0-2.el6.i686 Dec 29 19:21:10 Updated: tor-0.2.5.10-1.el6.i686 Then, traffic collapsed by going down from <> 8MB/sec to pretty much nothing. I checked the logs and found permission errors. The group for Tor was changed from _tor to toranon, so the permissions were wrong after the rpm was installed. Also, /etc/tor/torrc had this line commented : ## The directory for keeping all the keys/etc. By default, we store ## things in $HOME/.tor on Unix, and in Application Data\tor on Windows. DataDirectory /var/lib/tor So it was defaulting to ~tor directory, tor/tor.log-20141230:Dec 30 03:13:01.000 [warn] Default DataDirectory is "~/.tor". This expands to "/.tor", which is probably not what you want. Using "/var/tor" instead [root@plutonium log]# rpm -qa | grep tor torsocks-2.0.0-2.el6.i686 tor-0.2.5.10-1.el6.i686 [root@plutonium log]# Dec 29 17:56:47.000 [notice] Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 25 days 0:00 hours, with 1885 circuits open. I've sent 6843.34 GB and received 6761.80 GB. Dec 29 17:56:47.000 [notice] Average packaged cell fullness: 97.313% Dec 29 17:56:47.000 [notice] TLS write overhead: 2% Dec 29 17:56:47.000 [notice] Circuit handshake stats since last time: 16007/16007 TAP, 49264/49264 NTor. Dec 29 20:07:10.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdesc-consensus.tmp" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdesc-consensus) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:07:10.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:07:10.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:07:11.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:07:11.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:08:10.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:08:10.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:08:10.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:08:10.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:09:11.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:09:11.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:09:11.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:09:11.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:29:31.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-consensus.tmp" (/var/lib/tor/cached-consensus) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:29:32.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-descriptors.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-descriptors.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:29:32.000 [warn] Unable to store router descriptor I fixed the permissions, but I am seeing this message now that I have not seen before. Jan 1 21:36:02 p15186978 Tor[28986]: Invalid result from curve25519 handshake: 4 Jan 1 21:36:02 p15186978 Tor[28986]: onion_skin_client_handshake failed. Jan 1 21:36:02 p15186978 Tor[28986]: circuit_finish_handshake failed. Jan 1 21:36:02 p15186978 Tor[28986]: connection_edge_process_relay_cell (at origin) failed. Jan 1 21:36:04 p15186978 Tor[28986]: Performing bandwidth self-test...done. Should I be concerned about this message? [root@plutonium etc]# uname -a Linux plutonium 2.6.32-431.el6.i686 #1 SMP Fri Nov 22 00:26:36 UTC 2013 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux [root@plutonium etc]# cat /etc/redhat-release CentOS release 6.6 (Final) [root@plutonium etc]# Thanks, Sascha.

2 1

Relay is down
by Giovanny Andres Gongora Granada 01 Jan '15

01 Jan '15

Hi, My relay was up during 4 days, but now it's down. In the log it says: Dec 30 21:19:51.000 [warn] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '128.31.0.39:9131'. Please$ Dec 30 21:19:51.000 [warn] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '208.83.223.34:443'. Pleas$ Dec 30 21:19:51.000 [warn] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '131.188.40.189:80'. Pleas$ Dec 30 21:19:51.000 [warn] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '86.59.21.38:80'. Please c$ What could be happening? I restart it but it says the same on the log. Regards, Gio -- Mozilla Hispano: http://mozilla-hispano.org Mentor en mozilla-hispano.org: Gioyik <https://www.mozilla-hispano.org/documentacion/Usuario:Gioyik> Mozilla Colombia: Miembro en MozillaColombia <http://mozillacolombia.org/our-contributors/> twitter: Gioyik <https://twitter.com/Gioyik> Blog: gioyik.wordpress.com irc: gioyik

8 11

OT: folding@home
by Sebastian Urbach 28 Dec '14

28 Dec '14

Dear list members, I would like to invite any operator, who has some idle Cores (CPU or GPU) left,to join the folding@home distributed computing project: http://folding.stanford.edu/ There is now a brandnew team called Tor Project (Unofficial) with the id 227615. Hope to see some of you there :-) -- Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations Sebastian Urbach ----------------------------------------- Definition of Tor: 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and 100% reason to remember the name! -----------------------------------------

6 10

boost CPU on a Tor relay
by s7r 28 Dec '14

28 Dec '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, A Tor relay currently going 33MB/s could go a lot faster but CPU is at 93% usage - this is the bottleneck. Here is the output of /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 26 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz stepping : 5 microcode : 0x11 cpu MHz : 3068.000 cache size : 8192 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 8 core id : 0 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 0 initial apicid : 0 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 11 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx rdtscp lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm ida dtherm tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept vpid bogomips : 6132.24 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: it also goes down to processor 1 - processor 7 Any ideas how this could be boosted? OS is Debian wheezy. No aes-ni hardware acceleration, no openssl benchmarking or customization currently. advices? Thank you. - -- s7r PGP Fingerprint: 7C36 9232 5ABD FB0B 3021 03F1 837F A52C 8126 5B11 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUDuRTAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRLqYH/iSCtC9r/7/DBCG2qqUGPEgY TELvt+UMGyMP6ncNJH+vDEdHO4BBlSMzFQdj2sKyO3hOT5492cIOaT3gGokaDApL W913yqUkIfiUT6FUWJ6g4/LUt25pMG25Ednr/ZJJXR/pR+Ym3T3ytg+MSwRBmpEe +h26Q7qvd/p4f6VhTR0sEsxQfDLVXrEsj3kn0BL0rLklN5zH/bqmIsK2hio5Nl3H KBvbvyt+JbLhA/4+jygT6AygHDH9arpXWEh3ZcJVn7mE0OmPAvukdlLUj70K5F7r cCeMakcGBbSzit5tY7jUmSvkUewVBhAxAZmv1hgNnuCoSrGPtQZseCbM06cry+k= =TyKF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

6 10

Re: [tor-relays] OT: folding@home
by teor 27 Dec '14

27 Dec '14

Some thoughts on the security of crowdsourced computing: Installing additional software increases the attack surface of your relay, even more so when the new software access the network. (Not to mention any additional libraries.) There is also the issue of the security of automatic updates to the any executables - Folding@home may have less of an issue with this than BOINC, as there is only one project involved. If you're willing to accept the additional risk, it seems like a worthy cause. (There's also a minor additional power cost, which really only impacts your provider and the environment…) > Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 12:54:24 +0100 > From: mikael <mikael(a)gutanet.sk> > > Hi, > some years ago I contributed to https://secure.worldcommunitygrid.org/ > via BOINC (https://boinc.berkeley.edu/) but stoped. > Forgive my paranoia, but I couldn't find proof that it really helps what > they write, that the provided cpu power could doesn't land at NSA for > example :/ > > Any different experience? > >> On 12/26/14 6:55 PM, Sebastian Urbach wrote: >> Dear list members, >> >> I would like to invite any operator, who has some idle Cores (CPU or >> GPU) left,to join the folding@home distributed computing project: >> >> http://folding.stanford.edu/ >> >> There is now a brandnew team called Tor Project (Unofficial) with the >> id 227615. Hope to see some of you there :-) >

3 2

News reporting exit node attacks
by Austin Bentley 27 Dec '14

27 Dec '14

Anyone have any more information on any of this stuff? They claim it's a 0day but I have yet to see proof.

3 4

Possible DDoS
by Christian Burkert 26 Dec '14

26 Dec '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Hi *, I'm running a non-exit Tor node for a few months now on a virtual server hosted in a professional datacenter. That's the node: https://globe.torproject.org/#/relay/4C246EA9C950B872FD77F761CEAAB41D93D976… Yesterday, December 25th, the support wrote me, that my server is under a DDoS attack with 2GBit/s lasting over more than two hours. So, the hoster black holed my traffic to protect the other customers. The hoster wanted to know which services I'm running and told me that if I continue running Tor and further attacks will happen, then I would have to bear the costs. Eventually, I took down the Tor node to avoid further confrontation. Now I seek for your interpretation of this event: - - Has there been more recent incidents against Tor nodes? - - How can I investigate it? - - How should one react to a hoster? I mean they could have made up the whole thing... Looking forward to your comments Chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJUnUdDAAoJEHAzZ6ooPDSy0nMP/1lyHPPFBxpAOvEiWL+ijrvA SPViJvZH/cPUS/11M7qm+bsZa/fbiRk6kY8ADcY8abe1Z8lHzMYPGwZvKaIijiZG M8hjCHtMWLipO6iLmVfFskDtRn37Ga2ibEhGkVesDV53kPcotgg4i7tIqIuNb11X Gnkk+WpYwkrS9nPZjYNLmce093s4lux/N5GyRY/gQii+h9mfDJ++W+1ueNU94UQ0 bvK1wF7MdicWlu0kR49hCgFtDFh7uUjP87MPZmmQYHI82qWhTJxqOuuImrnJew2k pCFSzn03x/hXg1QFNPNLsqHU9OhUob3/z17Azcpbir15mY4/YE7Gq14/LBM+FKh0 LqGjzaVbQo0hs0kE2yFk5sEP0Dsv5aiOUItqFIMTG52FYZ6cUh/eTxMd6vblHwfU ujil0rFCRqtmbF6wIDBuXDxc0fmdaRMWTDfSlPxYGkfUaq1tSea1OAvjFpheOcNM wu9QiTSq9BTLY010iHSYQDknSr+gFkc/ooNLsPV1AAZFyMlG0epLww6tqR7C9hZq RyEX9piqGal7mU56gETxhDrD0Z/aKgXMbS+KvYfZhopGWEVg5vbWPGxAId53nhr6 hjvLyFmy68hBdbOB/pvp8qvw8veQR3niiHIxhxAl+BIQzXX45x0uVCPHFUpbbLp5 POIwpEJ46oaz7+cddAHf =TcPt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 4

Re: [tor-relays] Possible DDoS
by Sebastian Urbach 26 Dec '14

26 Dec '14

On December 26, 2014 12:41:51 PM Christian Burkert <post(a)cburkert.de> wrote: Hi, > I'm running a non-exit Tor node for a few months now on a virtual server > hosted in a professional datacenter. Thank you ! > Yesterday, December 25th, the support wrote me, that my server is > under a DDoS attack with 2GBit/s lasting over more than two hours. So, > the hoster black holed my traffic to protect the other customers. I've seen this behaviour from some ISP's before and it's rather sad. If something like this happens my ISP is taking care of it without disabling my systems. I'm just getting a note with all the technical information and that's it. > The hoster wanted to know which services I'm running and told me that > if I continue running Tor and further attacks will happen, then I > would have to bear the costs. > Eventually, I took down the Tor node to avoid further confrontation. That's interesting, they gave you some infos like the time and the amount but nothing else ? Seems to me that they're pretty clueless and are fishing in the dark. Another reason for their behaviour could be that they want to get rid of you / your Tor node. Threatening customers is really sad, sounds like they heard the word Tor from you and then concluded "oh, than he basically asked for the attack". > > Now I seek for your interpretation of this event: > - - Has there been more recent incidents against Tor nodes? Nothing with that magnitude on my end for weeks. > - - How can I investigate it? You can ask your ISP for their logs regarding that attack. Do you have any logs on your system, maybe from a intrusion detection or anything else ? > - - How should one react to a hoster? I mean they could have made up the > whole thing... If you are already considering this than i would recommend changing to another ISP, sounds like there is already some distrust. > > Looking forward to your comments > Chris > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ > > iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJUnUdDAAoJEHAzZ6ooPDSy0nMP/1lyHPPFBxpAOvEiWL+ijrvA > SPViJvZH/cPUS/11M7qm+bsZa/fbiRk6kY8ADcY8abe1Z8lHzMYPGwZvKaIijiZG > M8hjCHtMWLipO6iLmVfFskDtRn37Ga2ibEhGkVesDV53kPcotgg4i7tIqIuNb11X > Gnkk+WpYwkrS9nPZjYNLmce093s4lux/N5GyRY/gQii+h9mfDJ++W+1ueNU94UQ0 > bvK1wF7MdicWlu0kR49hCgFtDFh7uUjP87MPZmmQYHI82qWhTJxqOuuImrnJew2k > pCFSzn03x/hXg1QFNPNLsqHU9OhUob3/z17Azcpbir15mY4/YE7Gq14/LBM+FKh0 > LqGjzaVbQo0hs0kE2yFk5sEP0Dsv5aiOUItqFIMTG52FYZ6cUh/eTxMd6vblHwfU > ujil0rFCRqtmbF6wIDBuXDxc0fmdaRMWTDfSlPxYGkfUaq1tSea1OAvjFpheOcNM > wu9QiTSq9BTLY010iHSYQDknSr+gFkc/ooNLsPV1AAZFyMlG0epLww6tqR7C9hZq > RyEX9piqGal7mU56gETxhDrD0Z/aKgXMbS+KvYfZhopGWEVg5vbWPGxAId53nhr6 > hjvLyFmy68hBdbOB/pvp8qvw8veQR3niiHIxhxAl+BIQzXX45x0uVCPHFUpbbLp5 > POIwpEJ46oaz7+cddAHf > =TcPt > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays -- Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations Sebastian Urbach ----------------------------------------- Definition of Tor: 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and 100% reason to remember the name! -----------------------------------------

2 1

Tor Weather doesn't register my fingerprint
by Giovanny Andres Gongora Granada 26 Dec '14

26 Dec '14

Hi, Today I decided to run a Tor Relay and contribute to Tor Project on a Rackspace that I have free for it. I want to use Tor Weather to get notifications about my relay, but when I try to register my fingerprint it doesn't accept it. What could be needed to register it? My fingerprint is: 4C90453B94DAC00BE356283F427CECE024B9D224 This is the info about my relay: https://globe.torproject.org/#/relay/4C90453B94DAC00BE356283F427CECE024B9D2… Regards, Gio -- Mozilla Hispano: http://mozilla-hispano.org Mentor en mozilla-hispano.org: Gioyik <https://www.mozilla-hispano.org/documentacion/Usuario:Gioyik> Mozilla Colombia: Miembro en MozillaColombia <http://mozillacolombia.org/our-contributors/> twitter: Gioyik <https://twitter.com/Gioyik> Blog: gioyik.wordpress.com irc: gioyik

2 1

iptables
by mikael 24 Dec '14

24 Dec '14

Hi, I don't know what to do. Please help. I'm getting the following warnings in arm: 16:13:15 [WARN] Your server (MY_PUBLIC_IP:9030) has not managed to confirm that its DirPort is reachable. Please check your firewalls, ports, address, /etc/hosts file, etc. 16:13:15 [WARN] Your server (MY_PUBLIC_IP:443) has not managed to confirm that its ORPort is reachable. Please check your firewalls, ports, address, /etc/hosts file, etc. My iptables rules are: mike@host:~$ sudo iptables -nL Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 REJECT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 127.0.0.0/8 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED REJECT all -- 62.210.140.93 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable REJECT all -- 62.210.151.213 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable REJECT all -- 103.41.124.106 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable REJECT all -- 103.41.124.112 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable REJECT all -- 109.230.220.135 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable REJECT all -- 115.84.179.148 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable REJECT all -- 117.21.225.176 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable REJECT all -- 188.116.19.109 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable REJECT all -- 219.232.239.40 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable REJECT all -- 221.235.188.214 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:443 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW tcp dpt:22 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:53 ACCEPT udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp spt:53 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:9001 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:9030 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpts:6881:6999 ACCEPT udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpts:6881:6999 ACCEPT icmp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 8 LOG all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 limit: avg 5/min burst 5 LOG flags 0 level 7 prefix `iptables denied: ' REJECT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination REJECT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0

2 2