- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Re: [tor-relays] HardwareAccel: Current proper use???
by Sebastian Urbach 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

On January 3, 2015 10:41:42 AM usprey <usprey(a)gmail.com> wrote: Hi usprey, > Summary: > The documentation is still somewhat vague on the best use of the > "HardwareAccel" option. > > > *HardwareAccel* *0*|*1* The docu is not exactly a high-performance howto :-) > > > > If non-zero, try to use built-in (static) crypto hardware acceleration > > when available. (Default: 0) > > > I could not find a definitive answer in the archives or in > https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/log/?qt=grep&q=hardwareaccel&showmsg=1 > . > > https://www.torservers.net/wiki/setup/server#aes-ni_crypto_acceleration claims > no intervention is needed in regards of aes-ni accelaration, but I would > like to add an explanation or source to this recommendation. > > Question_1: > If my CPU supports and have loaded aesni_intel on linux with OpenSSL is > 1.0.1.j-1, should I leave HardwareAccel off or explicitly enable it? You don't have to change anything with 1.0.1.j-1, leave the default. > > Question_2: > What does "*built-in (static) crypto hardware acceleration*" refer to? > Dedicated hardware, CPU-support or...? It specifically means that you have the aes_ni cpu capabilities / flag. I have seen this flag on dedicated systems and also on vps systems as well. If the cpu / bios provides the flag and all other requirements are met (as stated in the torservers.net docu) you can use that feature on any system. I would very much appreciate it if you would switch to text mail format, thanks. Thank you very much for running a relay ! > > Best regards > > > > ---------- > _______________________________________________ > 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! -----------------------------------------

3 4

High speed exit question
by Kura 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

Hey guys, I recently decided to get myself an 8 core, 16 GB RAM machine to use for running an exit relay and was wondering, Tor only works on one core, even setting NumCPUs to 2 doesn't do a whole lot so, how is it even possible to get more than maybe, 300Mbps or so from one relay? Maybe I'm missing something but, running multiple Tor processes is just going to have multiple relays with different OR and Dir ports for each, right? -- Kura t: @kuramanga [https://twitter.com/kuramanga] w: https://kura.io/ [https://kura.io/] g: @kura [http://git.io/kura]

6 8

HardwareAccel: Current proper use???
by usprey 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

Summary: The documentation is still somewhat vague on the best use of the "HardwareAccel" option. > *HardwareAccel* *0*|*1* > > If non-zero, try to use built-in (static) crypto hardware acceleration > when available. (Default: 0) > I could not find a definitive answer in the archives or in https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/log/?qt=grep&q=hardwareaccel&showmsg=1 . https://www.torservers.net/wiki/setup/server#aes-ni_crypto_acceleration claims no intervention is needed in regards of aes-ni accelaration, but I would like to add an explanation or source to this recommendation. Question_1: If my CPU supports and have loaded aesni_intel on linux with OpenSSL is 1.0.1.j-1, should I leave HardwareAccel off or explicitly enable it? Question_2: What does "*built-in (static) crypto hardware acceleration*" refer to? Dedicated hardware, CPU-support or...? Best regards

2 2

Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's
by SiNA Rabbani 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

There was a new line added to authority director configs, which was a response to the recent Sybil attack [1]: MinUptimeHidServDirectoryV2 96 hours That's only 4 days, I wonder if anything else has changed. --SiNA [1] https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-consensus-health/2014-December/0… "Be the change that you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi ----- On Jan 2, 2015, at 2:51 PM, Sebastian G. <bastik.tor> bastik.tor(a)googlemail.com wrote: > 02.01.2015, 19:47 Kura: >> I think something must have happened, I restarted half a dozen or so >> of my relays over a week ago and none of them have been given the >> HSDir flag, which if I remember rightly is a 21 hour flag? I may be >> mistaken but, I would have expected that flag to be back with over a >> week of uptime. > > It used to be a 25 hour flag. 1 day plus an additional hour. > > I think (yes, that says I don't know) the period being longer than 24 > hours had something to do with an attack to get relays under adversary > control in the right position to become a HSDir for some > hidden-services. If one pays for a relays by days an additional hour is > an additional day for an attacker. > > I may have missed something, but maybe it was raised. > > I do remember that changes to Guards took place, like requiring them to > have more bandwidth and to reducing the number of Guards clients would > use. This was due to research. > > Regards, > Sebastian > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by bigbudtor＠Safe-mail.net 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

Thanks Sebastian, That explains the loss of guard status back in August at least. I totally missed that announcement. Back to the main issue, it does look like one or two others at least are having this problem. Is it simply as a result of being in a Lizard-blacklisted netblock? Bigbud is in 85.119.0.0/16. Is the current Lizard-blacklist published or is it only known to the directory authorities? thanks BB > Hi, > Found the snippet with the changes for the guards: > Tor Weekly News, 30th of July 2014 > Once directory authorities have upgraded, they will “assign the Guard flag > to the fastest 25% of the network”. Some experiments showed that “for the > current network, this results in about 1100 guards, down from 2500.” > > -- > Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations > > Sebastian Urbach

2 1

Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by Sebastian Urbach 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

Hi, Found the snippet with the changes for the guards: Tor Weekly News, 30th of July 2014 Once directory authorities have upgraded, they will “assign the Guard flag to the fastest 25% of the network”. Some experiments showed that “for the current network, this results in about 1100 guards, down from 2500.” -- 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! -----------------------------------------

1 0

Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by bigbudtor＠Safe-mail.net 03 Jan '15

03 Jan '15

On the 29th December one of our relays, bigbud (6911888F83565892FE23F1B03EB501D80E1E8780) which had a consensus of 630+ and had been running for nearly 18 months (100 days uptime running 2.5.8) suddenly started receiving much less traffic. I have seen a gradual reduction in traffic over the course of the last year but on the 29th the drop off was very significant and I saw in Atlas that the consensus is dropped to 20. When I look at the consensus files it shows that bigbud has a consensus of 20 and that Unmeasured was set to 1. Any ideas please? I upgraded Tor to 2.5.10 after I noticed the consensus drop. Is this something to do with the Lizard new relay flood or something or is there an actual problem with the relay? On a related note the relay lost guard status too a few months ago and I couldn't see why that would be.

3 2

Re: [tor-relays] sudden drop
by Spencer Rhodes 02 Jan '15

02 Jan '15

Not sure if related, but I noticed today one of my exit relays was not operating properly. Turned out the bind server was not resolving properly. I turned off dnssec and it started working again... On January 2, 2015 6:45:30 PM EST, tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org wrote: >Send tor-relays mailing list submissions to > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at > tor-relays-owner(a)lists.torproject.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of tor-relays digest..." > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Reduced number of HSDir's (Sebastian Urbach) > 2. Re: Reduced number of HSDir's (Austin Bentley) > 3. Re: Reduced number of HSDir's (Kura) > 4. Re: Reduced number of HSDir's (Sebastian G. <bastik.tor>) > 5. Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20 > (bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net) > 6. Re: Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20 (s7r) > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: Sebastian Urbach <sebastian(a)urbach.org> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 12:25:06 EST 2015 >Subject: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >Hi, > >https://metrics.torproject.org shows a big nose dive recently regarding >the >number of HSDir's. Did i miss anything relevant in the last days ? That > >seem to be the reason why i see increasing download numbers on my >system. > >Thanks for any lind of info. >-- >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! >----------------------------------------- > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: Austin Bentley <ab6d9(a)mst.edu> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 13:29:33 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >No clue. I wonder if there's some backlash from a anti-attack mechanism >of >some sort? There was a few attempted attacks against the Tor network, >but >it wasn't anything worth discussing. Check out the post on the 31st >from >blog.torproject.org. > >On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Sebastian Urbach ><sebastian(a)urbach.org> >wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> https://metrics.torproject.org shows a big nose dive recently >regarding >> the number of HSDir's. Did i miss anything relevant in the last days >? That >> seem to be the reason why i see increasing download numbers on my >system. >> >> Thanks for any lind of info. >> -- >> 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! >> ----------------------------------------- >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> tor-relays mailing list >> tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >> > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: Kura <kura(a)kura.io> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 13:47:51 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >I think something must have happened, I restarted half a dozen or so of >my relays over a week ago and none of them have been given the >HSDir flag, which if I remember rightly is a 21 hour flag? I may be >mistaken but, I would have expected that flag to be back with over a >week of uptime. > > >-- >Kura > >t: @kuramanga [https://twitter.com/kuramanga] >w: https://kura.io/ [https://kura.io/] >g: @kura [http://git.io/kura] >On 02/01/2015 18:30:00, Austin Bentley <ab6d9(a)mst.edu> wrote: >No clue. I wonder if there's some backlash from a anti-attack mechanism >of some sort? There was a few attempted attacks against the Tor >network, but it wasn't anything worth discussing. Check out the post on >the 31st from blog.torproject.org [http://blog.torproject.org] > > >On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Sebastian Urbach <sebastian(a)urbach.org >[mailto:sebastian@urbach.org]> wrote: > >Hi, > >https://metrics.torproject.org [https://metrics.torproject.org] shows a >big nose dive recently regarding the number of HSDir's. Did i miss >anything relevant in the last days ? That seem to be the reason why i >see increasing download numbers on my system. > >Thanks for any lind of info. >-- >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! >----------------------------------------- > > >_______________________________________________ >tor-relays mailing list >tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >[mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org] >https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >[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 > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: "Sebastian G. <bastik.tor>" <bastik.tor(a)googlemail.com> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 14:51:26 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >02.01.2015, 19:47 Kura: >> I think something must have happened, I restarted half a dozen or so >> of my relays over a week ago and none of them have been given the >> HSDir flag, which if I remember rightly is a 21 hour flag? I may be >> mistaken but, I would have expected that flag to be back with over a >> week of uptime. > >It used to be a 25 hour flag. 1 day plus an additional hour. > >I think (yes, that says I don't know) the period being longer than 24 >hours had something to do with an attack to get relays under adversary >control in the right position to become a HSDir for some >hidden-services. If one pays for a relays by days an additional hour is >an additional day for an attacker. > >I may have missed something, but maybe it was raised. > >I do remember that changes to Guards took place, like requiring them to >have more bandwidth and to reducing the number of Guards clients would >use. This was due to research. > >Regards, >Sebastian > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 18:28:48 EST 2015 >Subject: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back >to 20 > >On the 29th December one of our relays, bigbud >(6911888F83565892FE23F1B03EB501D80E1E8780) which had a consensus of >630+ and had been running for nearly 18 months (100 days uptime running >2.5.8) suddenly started receiving much less traffic. > >I have seen a gradual reduction in traffic over the course of the last >year but on the 29th the drop off was very significant and I saw in >Atlas that the consensus is dropped to 20. When I look at the consensus >files it shows that bigbud has a consensus of 20 and that Unmeasured >was set to 1. > >Any ideas please? I upgraded Tor to 2.5.10 after I noticed the >consensus drop. Is this something to do with the Lizard new relay flood >or something or is there an actual problem with the relay? > >On a related note the relay lost guard status too a few months ago and >I couldn't see why that would be. > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: s7r <s7r(a)sky-ip.org> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 18:39:52 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped >back to 20 > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >This was reported yesterday 01.01.2015 in IRC too, for this relay: > >3D7E274A87D9A89AF064C13D1EE4CA1F184F2600 > >The same it was pushing good amounts of traffic and the consensus >weight dropped to 20 with no modifications made to the Tor config file >or anything. You are the 3rd person who reports this, seams like worth >investigating further. > >I can see both of them are exits, but doubt this has anything to do >with it. > >Could it be a measurement problem from the bandwidth authorities? Why >would it happen only to very few relays in this case? > >On 1/3/2015 1:28 AM, bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net wrote: >> On the 29th December one of our relays, bigbud >> (6911888F83565892FE23F1B03EB501D80E1E8780) which had a consensus of >> 630+ and had been running for nearly 18 months (100 days uptime >> running 2.5.8) suddenly started receiving much less traffic. >> >> I have seen a gradual reduction in traffic over the course of the >> last year but on the 29th the drop off was very significant and I >> saw in Atlas that the consensus is dropped to 20. When I look at >> the consensus files it shows that bigbud has a consensus of 20 and >> that Unmeasured was set to 1. >> >> Any ideas please? I upgraded Tor to 2.5.10 after I noticed the >> consensus drop. Is this something to do with the Lizard new relay >> flood or something or is there an actual problem with the relay? >> >> On a related note the relay lost guard status too a few months ago >> and I couldn't see why that would be. >> _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing >> list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) > >iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUpyxIAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRB6MH+wWzDQPlhf+H4KWkoX9J6jhc >GQbL3+YmmZP1Eh941hnE6zaHpk5OUZiDarovBxSdL0FPEyHWlvLJIsFR6VXmfq2s >RB4hId21mKR5HQLNy/at6KP4Xs7dv3Qyid/KCZK3qH82HtJ9Yt9lA6yNTT8uLWmV >zIr1SKAMltBiIVrBWZaNGtqy5NVrGiF3yx2VYuHT7ZORL1l8BVjvG2I9d+/n2n7r >3RdEUKXSeFp/UnLlN5M9ZhHEdQLkioKfUisnkHdPKu7LTvWlVIONCm0t5lHo62xh >MUmbBP+lrWMfmQE8sJaTgmlJKq26Gb+JtG7uXV8k+XOfDokQygnFclJwZtUnKrQ= >=9kZo >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >tor-relays mailing list >tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays -- Sent from my phone.

1 0

Reduced number of HSDir's
by Sebastian Urbach 02 Jan '15

02 Jan '15

Hi, https://metrics.torproject.org shows a big nose dive recently regarding the number of HSDir's. Did i miss anything relevant in the last days ? That seem to be the reason why i see increasing download numbers on my system. Thanks for any lind of info. -- 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! -----------------------------------------

4 3

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