- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Fwd: New tor node not acting as an exit server?
by Niles Rogoff 08 Sep '13

08 Sep '13

I scrapped my previous exit node and set up a new one on a different machine. It's been running for 6 and a half hours, but does not have the exit flag. The logs say both my ORPort and DirPort are reachable from the outside, and using arm from a different machine shows two circuits open. >From the config file: ExitPolicy reject 192.168.0.0/16:*,accept *:80,accept *:443,reject *:* Anyone know why my new node isn't being used or recognized as an exit node? Did I forget a config option? Fingerprint: 1e598cdb9bbc751d753146d880b326952886d73b

2 2

Re: [tor-relays] Tor node was doing more traffic than its bandwidthis configured for
by tor＠t-3.net 08 Sep '13

08 Sep '13

Yeah, this must be wrong, then. I put this in the torrc: RelayBandwidthRate 35 MB RelayBandwidthBurst 40 MB and I was looking to limit it to 35-40 "M" as shown in Cacti, which would be MBits. On Sunday 08/09/2013 at 5:38 am, grarpamp wrote: > On 9/8/13, Roger Dingledine <arma(a)mit.edu> wrote: >> >> Are you sure you didn't confuse bits and bytes? Tor counts in bytes. >> >> (The arm monitor, if that's what you're using, counts in bits by >> default.) > > As with real networks and operators, if this is so, then big thank > you to arm people for correctly counting network bandwidth in bps. > No thanks on webhosters and isp's who convert their upstrream > bandwidth contracts into transfer bytes and pass that on to their > customers for their apache logs, thereby spoofing hosted network > *bandwidth* apps like Tor into feeling some silly need to count bytes. > Do wish Tor would speak properly in bits by default. > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

3 2

Guard failing large amount of circuits
by I 08 Sep '13

08 Sep '13

3 2

Tor node was doing more traffic than its bandwidth is configured for
by tor＠t-3.net 07 Sep '13

07 Sep '13

I updated our node to the RC version some days ago. Earlier today, it started to do a traffic amount that was higher than it had been configured to do in torrc. Torrc was configured for 35M use and 40M burst, but today it went to 50M and stayed there for an hour. Killing it HUP didn't help. I did a service restart on it to bring it back down.

3 2

User report with TBB 2.4.17rc
by David Carlson 07 Sep '13

07 Sep '13

As of the time-stamp on this e-mail it is extremely slow using TBB 2.4.17 rc to access such places as gmail.com. It took me about 10 minutes since I first fired it up to sent this email. David C

3 2

ExitPolicy reject *:* ships commented out?
by gordon＠thisblueroom.net 07 Sep '13

07 Sep '13

I convinced a friend to run a Tor relay (he was happy to do so) but he claims he just upgraded and that this line: ExitPolicy reject *:* # no exits allowed is commented out by default. So his VPS got shut down over a bunch of complaints and he got banned from Freenode on it. Is that true? I could've sworn 0.2.4.x shipped with that as the *default* exit policy - as it should, given the potentially catastrophic legal consequences in some countries for those setting up a relay who unwittingly set up an exit relay rather than a middle node. Best, -Gordon M.

9 9

[ARM] Connecting to another host's control port with ARM: Connection refused.
by Robert Charlton 06 Sep '13

06 Sep '13

Hello, Tor community. Quick, possibly noobish question. I'd like to use my desktop and connect ARM (running on the desktop) to the control port of a server running Tor on the same LAN, but it's refusing the connection. I'm running /sudo -u tor arm -i 10.0.0.3:9051/, and it outputs: robert@CPC-Arch:~$ sudo -u tor arm -i 10.0.0.3:9051 [sudo] password for robert: Connection refused. Is the ControlPort enabled? I can connect to the control port from the same host fine, but when I try to do it from another host it fails. There must be something I'm missing. Hope you guys can help me. Thanks. -Robert

3 3

The Tor flood
by David Carlson 06 Sep '13

06 Sep '13

I think that it may be somewhat ego-centric to accept the argument that this apparent flood is actually directed at the Tor network. It may be that the real goal is to find efficient weapons to attack the Internet as a whole, or major segments of it. It may be measuring the response time of the Tor network as well as that of various defenders who are trying to disarm bot-nets. David C

2 1

Raspberry Pi / Raspbian tor 0.2.4.17-rc binary .deb packages
by Gordon Morehouse 06 Sep '13

06 Sep '13

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Hello folks, I've built binary .deb packages for Raspbian, the Raspberry Pi flavor of armhf Debian built for the Pi's ARMv6 chip. You can get them here, or find instructions on how to build your own from source if you don't trust my build. https://github.com/gordon-morehouse/cipollini I haven't made any changes to the source itself - no Pi-specific optimizations - just built it on a Pi to get ARMv6 compatible executables; Debian wheezy armhf is targeted at ARMv7 and up, for those not familiar. Best, - -Gordon M. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSKm1tAAoJED/jpRoe7/ujjO4H/RfvL2PbUV48lbzLyyD4vuxH FmQdGNSGLyI2u6E2rbugpr5Y2OUVLZDXdPmbypen5rGEgKy73vOSjaoOLLiSu3+w VhOtoKZl4NvHIXFlU+wGddK51gZneUIpiARUqBry9vjglYoMaRHvOEaHrQrUb00f ioBxCgNyP4bLESGECPwIgT5X6PaISATin9fghGTQHQ84F1Zh2Kt7aViMK2RGxJRS WJdZ/PxURHC30uaN5R+KBNgcKHoZHIYTRqAhuD0bfcJbhgEAxDAyxBHB2bSzQOsi fW8IyXLrBshsHAllJZdt6wgcDarRUsMX6G6Y7SuvvNEwG4zXSU+2RnZaWWDygfY= =qxGc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

RaspPi with -enable-ec_nistp_64_gcc_128
by Harold Naparst 06 Sep '13

06 Sep '13

Yesterday, Nick Mathewson wrote: One thing that you should try is seeing whether the latest 0.2.4.x release does any better for you. In particular, I'd recommend trying the just-released 0.2.4.16-rc, with openssl 1.0.1e, and make sure that openssl 1.0.1e was built with the -enable-ec_nistp_64_gcc_128 option if possible. (I see you're already using 1.0.1e, but it doesn't appear to have been built with that option.) When I try to build openssl with this option on my Raspian system, I get *ecp_nistp224.c:43:3: error: unknown type name ‘__uint128_t’ * It would be helpful for me to get some guidance from someone who has done this on Raspbian. Regards, Harold

3 2