On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 02:55:24PM -0700, Damian Johnson wrote:
activities from the command line. First, "sudo apt install nyx".
Second, as the user that will be running nyx, run "sudo adduser $USER
debian-tor" to add your user to the debian-tor group so it can reach
Tor's controlsocket. Then log
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 01:19:21AM +, Paul Templeton wrote:
Whoever runs that node will need to talk to their ISP support team to
get it unblocked.
Thanks Andy - the reason I asked because its not with the Service Provider it's
there upstream carrier - I have lodged a ticket with the carri
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:48:33PM +, Paul Templeton wrote:
Has anyone come across a scenario where a carrier blocks IP traffic?
atlas.cogentco.com is the point which drops any packet to 95.130.9.210
From where I sit it looks like .210 is null-routed. All of my ISPs drop
the packets as s
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 01:57:39PM +0100, Dylan Issa wrote:
-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
hQIMA5oaOC9qY3MtARAAv1ojcczJvyrAdevP0H6naW32dz0KieYrguTZJSmXHe2U
wbk5hirrF5+IKek1zAT9wV2Rb7kjTuSwBrTEsTmfKIKatT6dFP9YnRrkX8syl8bV
1Bu1neznP6dTN6quInk754pKvcXZgL9f18Yqx7RMLiJE8OcLU52sdz3tI6UVz3Uh
and pgpdump
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 09:37:00AM +0200, IPonU wrote:
I'm already running a small exit node (100Mbps bandwidth) and I'm
ready to spend more money on it, so have a question for you guys :
Thanks for running a relay!
Is it better if I run other small ones (100Mbps too) or only 1 big
exit relay
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:14:54AM +1000, teor wrote:
On 22 Aug 2017, at 16:22, Roman Mamedov wrote:
Hello,
Today I found that it is possible to force OpenSSL enable the use of CPU AES
acceleration even if it doesn't detect the "aes" CPU flag.
This would be a great addition to tor/doc/TUNI
On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 07:24:00PM +, Schroedinger wrote:
Hi relay operators,
if anyone at SHA2017 is interested in meeting up, perhaps we could set
up a self-organized session for Tor relay operators.
I'll be at SHA, would love to meet up!
-andy
__
On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 10:13:30AM -0800, Michael McConville wrote:
> re...@mobtm.com wrote:
> > > Sadly, I have to shut it down at least temporarily if no one can help me
> > > pay for it. Is anyone interested? You can search the mailing lists to
> > > see that I've been contributing for a few yea
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:50:39PM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
> > In your opinion why is not it more accessible?
>
> You asked four times. We can't see your systems
> or your exits so we don't know.
Indeed! You can increase the Tor client debugging level on the machine
you're trying to TBB from, fin
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:09:37AM -0500, Libertas wrote:
> Hi, everyone. Linked below is a list of relays that were live last night
> along with the SSH authentication methods they support:
[snip]
> Generally, it is far more secure to allow only public key auth.
This is great advice, and thanks f
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 01:33:43PM -0800, I wrote:
> and if they were really into TOR why aren't they discussing it on this list?
because they're like two guys who threw up a under-$10k kickstarter and
had it completely explode under their feet, I suspect.
Succeeding far beyond your dreams at cro
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 08:31:22AM -0700, Michael Ball wrote:
> does anyone here know of any decent (and somewhat cheap) dedicated server
> providers that offer AES-NI crypto acceleration?
Nearly any host will be willing to quote you a price on a dedicated
server with AES-NI, just write to them as
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 05:09:50PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> Ops request: Deploy OpenVPN terminators
Anecdotally, the GFW blocks OpenVPN endpoints as well.
-andy
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 11:23:19PM -0400, Michael Wolf wrote:
> Will they request that port 80 be blocked
> because of the SQL injection and Wordpress vulnerability scans?
Yes, in fact we do get requests for exactly that (mostly from misguided
CERT type organizations). "We support anonymity, bu
On Sun, Mar 09, 2014 at 12:21:11PM -0400, Tora Tora Tora wrote:
> I am pretty sure the answer is "NO", but is there a way to "enhance"
> Tor in such a way that a relay that does not host hidden services
> can also choose not to carry traffic for hidden services?
> those who want to use hidden servi
On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 01:00:15PM +0100, toxi roxi wrote:
> i know that link and thats what i have done to setup intel aesni
> acceleration - but it seems that this tweak is not available anymore on
> ubuntu 13.10 thats what i've meant.
As Moritz says, the *config* is removed, because aes-ni is n
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 12:09:50PM -0500, Richard Budd wrote:
> Does anyone know if the Tor Project has sources for top that can be
> compiled on a Udoo Dual?
> It's running Ubuntu 11.10 (oneiric) on a ARMv7 processor.
> I've tried following the instructions on
> https://www.torproject.org/docs/deb
On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 at 07:59:45PM +0100, Oliver Schönefeld wrote:
> my ISP is offering 50 Mbps downstream 10 Mbps up, so i thought i'd
> share 20 Mbps max and 15 Mbps avg (respectively 2560 KBps max and 1920
> KBps avg) in a inner tor-relay.
> so i put the latter vaues in the bandwith-limits tab o
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 09:52:41PM -0400, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 06:12:47PM -0700, Andy Isaacson wrote:
> > That's correct, it takes a deliberate action on the part of the
> > administrator to become a relay; and another deliberate action to beco
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 12:53:48AM +, Paritesh Boyeyoko wrote:
> On a related note, just out of interest why was the decision taken that the
> default exit policy for an out-of-the-box relay allows any exits at all?
Out of the box, relays don't allow exit at all.
A relay admin has to explici
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 08:34:05AM -0400, Jonathan D. Proulx wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 04:35:15PM -0700, Andy Isaacson wrote:
> :In summary, it seems likely that IaaS is pwned wholesale. Colo hardware
> :is somewhat more expensive to attack and possibly succeeds in raising
> :
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 04:42:53PM -0400, Jonathan D. Proulx wrote:
> As I understand it there are three risk layers in each Tor node:
>
> 1) The node operator (who has r00t)
> 2) The data center (who has net)
> 3) The legal jurisdiction
>
> I've recently started running a couple of relays on pu
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 06:45:52PM +, jason wrote:
> I'm not sure why I missed this first post but I'm very interested in
> working on this project with whomever is interested. I bought a
> pogoplug v2 specifically to test it's usefulness as a tor exit or relay.
First step is, run "openssl sp
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 02:08:13PM +0300, Joe wrote:
> I'll have to reconsider, then. I assume middle relays see less
> traffic than exits?
I don't think that's true, currently it seems we need more middle nodes
than exit nodes based on my reading of the network statistics.
> I also keep reading
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 09:07:14PM +0300, J.C. wrote:
> Another amateur relay operator here, i run the node "namelesshero"
> and I sure hope however this cost reimbursing plan eventually pans
> out, it won't discourage small folk like us from running relays. I,
> too, believe the exact opposite is
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 12:25:47AM +0200, Sarah Vigote wrote:
> I would like to run a 100Mb/s tor exit node, but I have issues wrt
> power consumption.
>
> reading
> http://ortizaudio.blogspot.fr/2011/10/using-dreamplugs-crypto-chip.html
> it seems dreamplugs has *fast* aes-128-ecb.
>
> Does anyo
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:43:13PM -0700, Gordon Morehouse wrote:
> Thanks, Roger. I'm still not sure what finally caused the OOM-killer
> crash this morning after almost a couple weeks (?) of uptime. I was
> also seeing additional clock jump messages but didn't have time to
> diagnose it. The P
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 05:13:04PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> Are boxes that are doing these speeds running at a CPU or a network cap?
> Or maybe better asked, they do run at 100% usage of their cores or do
> they just use two/three cores to the max?
There are three main sinks of CPU usage in a
On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 10:35:22PM -0700, Robert Charlton wrote:
> Martin, setting ControlListenAddress to 10.0.0.3:9051 did the trick.
> I've also enabled cookie authentication. Obviously ARM running on
> something that's not a Tor server to connect to a server's control port
> has its limits, but
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 12:42:28PM -0700, David Carlson wrote:
> 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, o
On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 12:08:05PM -0700, Andy Isaacson wrote:
> After 20 minutes of uptime with 17-rc I'm not seeing the CPU pegged like
> it was within minutes of restart with 0.2.3.25, even though we are
> pushing 220 Mbps already.
Here's stats from the last hourly:
==>
On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 06:54:57AM -0400, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> So the more relays that upgrade to 0.2.4.17-rc, the more stable and fast
> Tor will be for 0.2.4 users, despite the huge circuit overload that the
> network is seeing.
>
> Please consider upgrading. If you do, though, please also
On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 11:32:55AM -0500, Pascal wrote:
> http://torstatus.blutmagie.de indicates that only 21.4% of Tor nodes
> are exit nodes. Are we wasting this precious resource by running
> non-exit traffic through these nodes?
More important than "what percent of nodes are exits" is: what
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 11:38:26AM -0400, That Guy wrote:
> > I run an exit node off of a residential Verizon connection and I
> > haven't seen a single threat, legal or otherwise so far, I dunno
> > why you're having so much trouble.
>
> Thank you for the reply but I have not either. My commen
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 04:27:12PM +0100, mick wrote:
> I'm currently seeing more than a doubling of connections (from a mean of
> c. 2000 established connections to just over 5000) on my relay at
> 0xbaddad. The log is full of the (expected) messages:
> "Your computer is too slow to handle this ma
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:08:34AM -0500, Jon Gardner wrote:
> Then why have exit policies? Exit nodes regularly block "unwelcome"
> traffic like bittorrent, and there's only a slight functional
> difference between that and using a filter in front of the node to
> block things like porn
The exit
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:52:14PM -0400, Allan Moon wrote:
> by virusessince starting relay.
What signs do you have that this is happening? Are you running AV on
your relay node, or something? What messages are you getting?
Good luck cleaning up your system. You mightw wan
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 10:28:59PM +0200, Moritz Bartl wrote:
> On 07.08.2013 22:11, Steve Snyder wrote:
> > Given plenty of RAM, a muti-core CPU and a single IP address, which is
> > more efficient:
> >
> > a single instance of Tor configured with "NumCPUs 2" or 2 instances of
> > Tor configured
On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 03:25:10PM -0600, Bryan Carey wrote:
> Thanks everyone for your input! I already had root access disabled via sshd
> config. I will look into fail2ban as it sounds like it remedies the problem
> I'm having.
I'm confused, what's the actual problem you're having?
Is the prob
On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 10:25:15PM +0800, Sanjeev Gupta wrote:
> I received, about 3 months ago, an email from a Police Officer. It was
> addressed to my address in the whois, and seemed to be written assuming I
> was an ISP. It cited a date and time range, an IP address, and asked which
> custom
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 06:20:29PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> Similarly, has anyone ever put a Tor/EFF exit relay notice and
> contact info on their door? Let their neighbors and/or flatmates
> know? Consulted with agencies likely to service warrants?
> Not to stop such legal process, but to lessen t
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 01:23:13PM -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Andy Isaacson wrote:
> > Yes, there are cases of law enforcement seizing all computer gear from a
> > house with a exit node -- not just the exit node computer. Most
> > rec
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 04:37:29PM +0100, Nick wrote:
> I'm probably going to move to a new ISP soon, and may well be able
> to get a fibre 20Mbps up connection, which is a nice thought. The
> question I have is whether my little ~1GHz home server box (a weird
> little x86 thing, I can dig out more
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 07:08:44PM +0200, Logforme wrote:
> The computer is somewhat dated but not ancient: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7
> CPU 930 @ 2.80GHz, 4 cores with HT, 6GB mem. I feel it should be
> able to handle a 80 mbit bandwidth but have no hard data to support
> this.
That CPU is powerful eno
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 06:45:58PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> > AMD doesn't seem to make any server CPUs that are useful for this
> > application, unfortunately.
>
> Really, how so? Many AMD CPU's have AES-NI. Even the
> A10-6800K (4 x 4.1GHz) would be decent.
That's not a server CPU. It doesn't s
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 08:46:20PM +0200, Andreas Fink wrote:
> can someone give me hints on what hardware would be best suited to run
> big fat tor exit nodes connected with multiple 1gbps or 10gps links?
> We are considering putting some fat boxes near major internet
> exchanges of the world.
Mo
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 07:04:12PM +0100, torre...@mail.md wrote:
> I currently have 1 bridge relay running on my AWS account.
>
> Is it possible to add another 2 bridge relays to run as separate
> instances from the same AWS account?
>
> I'm wondering if there might be issues with IP address all
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 04:31:01PM -0700, Nicolas Bock wrote:
> every time I run a relay on a Comcast cable connection, after a while (a
> few hours to days) other network operations such as DNS lookups slow down
> to such an extent that the network becomes unusable. Unfortunately I don't
> know ho
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:21:18PM +0200, Moritz Bartl wrote:
> At torservers.net, we run some large exit relays with an "allow all
> except port 25" policy.
>
> These are statistics from ARM showing exit port statistics of a fast
> exit running for seven hours at 30-40 MB/s:
>
> 443 HTTPS 17
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 02:36:32AM +, k...@damnfbi.tk wrote:
> Hey all,
> Has anyone contemplated pitching this towards hackerspaces running
> their own fast nodes?
I wouldn't recommend running an exit node on a network link that will
make you sad if it goes away for a few days. Most hackersp
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:48:16PM -0700, Sriakhil Gogineni wrote:
> Ball park quotes we got were 99$ / 100 Mbps or $599 / 1000 Mbps for transit
> for a single 1U... we'll see if we can get something better...
That's a good quote for 1Gbps.
> Would this be helpful / viable option for a Tor exit n
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:10:48PM +0200, Rejo Zenger wrote:
> > There are at least two cases where the exit operator has been
> > slapped with a 'national security' gag order and cannot talk about
> > the case.
>
> These two are both German cases? - if you are allowed to elaborate on
> that.
I h
noisetor-01 was pushing 300-400 Mbps of traffic from 2012-02-15
through 2012-04-13. Since mid-April we've seen traffic decrease
significantly; over the last week, our daily peak has been 260 Mbps
(versus 450 Mbps in March) and our daily trough has been 100 Mbps
(versus 300 Mbps in March).
The tra
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 09:32:24AM +0100, krugar wrote:
> On 02/14/2012 08:40 PM, Andy Isaacson wrote:
> > Noisetor is showing a significant, sustained drop in bandwidth usage
> > starting approximately February 7-8. We've checked our setup and logs
> > and there doesn&
Noisetor is showing a significant, sustained drop in bandwidth usage
starting approximately February 7-8. We've checked our setup and logs
and there doesn't appear to be any sign of a causative factor here.
Throughout January and the first week of February we were averaging
400-500 Mbps. There w
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 01:07:36AM +0100, Marinos Yannikos wrote:
> Using Tor 0.2.2.35 (git-4f42b0a93422f70e), OpenSSL 0.9.8o:
>
> Jan 12 21:17:25 XXX kernel: [ 4257.857564] tor[1909] trap invalid
> opcode ip:7fa7dd61f8f7 sp:7fa7daf80400 error:0 in
> libcrypto.so.0.9.8[7fa7dd574000+175000]
>
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 02:07:13AM +, Tor Relays at brwyatt.net wrote:
> I just got this sent to me, not sure if it is legit or not. I'm going to
> assume the worst for now, thought I'd send it out here for discussion and
> as a heads up for anyone who hasn't yet gotten one of these. I'm hesita
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 07:59:31AM +0100, Klaus Layer wrote:
> within two days I received abuse complaints from my ISP that someone
> used my exit node to brute force ssh accounts of two different ISP.
> Unfortunately I am forced to block port 22 to avoid shutdown. Anyone
> else who suffered from s
On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 06:57:22PM -0800, Mike Perry wrote:
> We'll probably be running this next experiment for about a week (or
> perhaps longer if it doesn't explode and seems to improve performance
> on https://metrics.torproject.org/performance.html) starting tonight
> or tomorrow.
>
> Please
On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 10:35:03PM +0100, Klaus Layer wrote:
> Andy Isaacson wrote on 03.12.2011:
> > Since DNS is the most frequent UDP traffic you'll see on a Tor node,
> > perhaps this is simply a symptom of high packet loss on your NIC.
>
> It's a gigabit l
On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 07:38:05AM +0100, Klaus Layer wrote:
> my logs are full of these messages:
> 05:54:07 [NOTICE] eventdns: Nameserver 127.0.0.1 is back up
> 05:54:07 [WARN] eventdns: All nameservers have failed
[snip]
> I am wondering if the high bandwidth nodes from torservers and
> noisebri
61 matches
Mail list logo
