I run the non-exit relay 8F6A78B1EA917F2BF221E87D14361C050A70CCC3
Today I noticed two [warn] lines in the Tor log file that I have not
seen before:
[warn] Error relaying cell across rendezvous; closing circuits
[warn] circuit_mark_for_close_(): Bug: Duplicate call to
circuit_mark_for_close at
I got the below message on my relay #2. It's been in operation for a year and a
half. First time I've
ever got one of these.
0re7:26:40 [WARN] Your computer is too slow to handle this many circuit
creation requests! Please consider using the MaxAdvertisedBandwidth config
option or choosing a mo
Hi all
I found a message in the logs:
Apr 16 15:07:46.000 [warn] Received a bad CERTS cell: Link certificate
does not match TLS certificate
--
Cheers Felix
pgpz8Afm4HlbY.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-r
Hi,
I had issues with my bridge who is running on a Raspberry pi 3+ so i've decided
to completely reinstall it.
First i saved my torrc file and my "keys" folder from /var/lib/tor.
First thing i did after a clean install of the server was to copy and paste my
torrc file in /etc/tor/ and the fil
Hi,
*UPDATE**
I'm still seeing these warning messages but in a lower frequency:
Your computer is too slow to handle this many circuit creation requests! Please
consider using the MaxAdvertisedBandwidth config option or choosing a more
restricted exit policy. [1077 similar message(s) suppressed in
Hi,
Running for more than a week the alpha version 0.3.3.2 (git-7b1d356bdb76607d)
the issue seems to be resolved.
Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 11:59 hours, with 19157 circuits open. I've
sent 2372.16 GB and received 2372.27 GB.
Cheers,
~Vasilis
--
Fingerprint: 8FD5 CF5F 39FC 03EB B382 747
Roger Dingledine:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 01:13:00PM +, Vasilis wrote:
>> I see a number of warning log messages on a dedicated server:
>> [WARN] Your computer is too slow to handle this many circuit creation
>> requests!
>
> You get that warning message when there are too many create cells
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 01:13:00PM +, Vasilis wrote:
> I see a number of warning log messages on a dedicated server:
> [WARN] Your computer is too slow to handle this many circuit creation
> requests!
You get that warning message when there are too many create cells coming
in, and your relay
Hi,
I see a number of warning log messages on a dedicated server:
[WARN] Your computer is too slow to handle this many circuit creation requests!
Please consider using the MaxAdvertisedBandwidth config option or choosing a
more restricted exit policy. [27615 similar message(s) suppressed in last 6
> On 1 Aug 2017, at 08:17, Ybslik wrote:
> ...
>
> Me - 9D60A484CFBDB5B890FB5B18941494734584BA17
>
> ...
> Jul 31 20:37:34.000 [notice] Since startup, we have initiated 0 v1
> connections, 0 v2 connections, 3 v3 connections, and 908239 v4 connections;
> and receive
On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 09:58:02PM +0200, Felix wrote:
> [warn] channelpadding_compute_time_until_pad_for_netflow: Bug: Channel
> padding timeout scheduled 212ms in the past. Did the monotonic clock just
> jump? (on Tor 0.3.1.3-alpha dc47d936d47ffc25)
https://bugs.torproject.org/22212
> and
>
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/03/2017 09:58 PM, Felix wrote:
> Switching to 3.1.4a might fix it ?
Doubt,
got it today too (just once till now) at 0.3.1.4-alpha
- --
Toralf
PGP C4EACDDE 0076E94E
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
iI0EAREIADUWIQQaN2+ZSp0CbxPiTc/E6s3eAHbpTgUCWV
Hi everybody
On 3.1.3a there are quiet some log entries like 10 per day and relay,
more cicuits - more entries:
[warn] channelpadding_compute_time_until_pad_for_netflow: Bug: Channel
padding timeout scheduled 212ms in the past. Did the monotonic clock
just jump? (on Tor 0.3.1.3-alpha dc47d93
[warn] circuit_mark_for_close_(): Bug: Duplicate call to circuit_mark_for_close
at ../src/or/onion.c:238 (first at ../src/or/command.c:579) (on Tor 0.2.9.10 )
Can this warning be neglected - I thought it is a BSD and not a Linux issue?
Got nearly a hundred of them today - all with the same time s
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/20711
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
pa011:
> I am running (FreeBSD 11.0-RELEASE-p2) Tor 0.2.8.11
> getting following warnings while Self-testing indicates that DirPort is
> reachable from the outside?
>
> Can these warnings be ignored, while Tor is running properly afterwards ?
> Dec 24 13:21:57.000 [warn] Cannot make an outgoin
I am running (FreeBSD 11.0-RELEASE-p2) Tor 0.2.8.11
getting following warnings while Self-testing indicates that DirPort is
reachable from the outside?
Can these warnings be ignored, while Tor is running properly afterwards ?
Merry Christmas!
Paul
Dec 24 13:20:57.000 [notice] Bootstrapped 8
Looks like this is solved and belonged to not open ports
Sorry for the hassle
Paul
Am 16.08.2016 um 18:34 schrieb pa011:
> Just established a new Exit with two instances on (Linux 3.16.0-4-amd64) ,Tor
> 0.2.8.6
>
> On the second instance I get these warnings:
>
> [WARN] Remote server sent
Just established a new Exit with two instances on (Linux 3.16.0-4-amd64) ,Tor
0.2.8.6
On the second instance I get these warnings:
[WARN] Remote server sent bogus reason code 65021 [21 duplicates hidden]
[WARN] Remote server sent bogus reason code 65023 [95 duplicates hidden]
[NOTICE] Have tr
Hello,
This warn is known for some time. It's safe to ignore this warning no
matter how many times you see it in your log file, IIRC it's a libevent
issue when DNS resolvers are idle. All my exit relays have multiple such
lines in the log files constantly.
It's highly important to run your own re
It's been mentioned here once before, but you shouldn't be using
Google's DNS servers as they see almost all of the Tor network traffic.
My solution was to run a local DNS resolver (unbound in my case) and to
use at least 2 DNS servers from the Open NIC project:
https://www.opennicproject.org/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 06/19/2016 09:59 PM, pa011 wrote:
> Or are there better working solutions?
I do have only 127.0.0.1 set in my resolv.conf and do use dnsmasq together with
strict DNSSEC.
works like a charm and DNSSEC is really a good thing IMO.
The configuratio
Jun 19 20:24:38.000 [warn] eventdns: All nameservers have failed
Jun 19 20:24:38.000 [notice] eventdns: Nameserver 8.8.4.4:53 is back up
I do get this in my logs on an exit (Tor 0.2.7.6) several times every hour.
The /etc/resolv.conf contains
# Generated by SolusVM
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver
On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 11:07:15AM +0100, Robin Kjeld wrote:
> Jun 02 07:24:40.000 [warn] Received http status code 504 ("Gateway Time-
> out") from server '154.35.175.225:80'
Right, that is the directory authority 'faravahar' being broken again. It
does this sometimes, unfortunately causing scary
Tor version 0.2.7.6
Tor relay logged this a few times:
Jun 02 07:24:40.000 [warn] Received http status code 504 ("Gateway Time-
out") from server '154.35.175.225:80' while fetching "/tor/server/d/6D3-
3995A9D954195FCDB0385B6A26F0F71543161+6F7D97B389CBF5409D4011155047C70E9-
FCB832C+70041AC73A41186
On Sunday 21 February 2016 12:02:49 nusenu wrote:
> > since I upgraded the torland relay from 2.6.7 to 0.2.7.6 I get the
> > following warnings:
> >
> > 09:20:30 [WARN] Failing because we have 4063 connections already. Please
> > read doc/TUNING for guidance. [101144347 similar message(s) suppress
On Sunday 21 February 2016 12:57:52 Julien ROBIN wrote:
> When I had 2 tor clients running (the second launched manually by a user
> named "tor2"), I modified the "limits.conf" file, adding those 2 lines at
> the end :
>
> #* softcore0
> #roothardcore
On Sunday 21 February 2016 11:56:37 Jonas Bergler wrote:
> https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/tree/doc/TUNING
Thanks Jonas for the link. file descriptors should be set to ulimit -n 65535 in
the tor startup script. I thought that would work. But checking
/proc/PID/limits I saw that file descri
> since I upgraded the torland relay from 2.6.7 to 0.2.7.6 I get the following
> warnings:
>
> 09:20:30 [WARN] Failing because we have 4063 connections already. Please read
> doc/TUNING for guidance. [101144347 similar message(s) suppressed in last
> 21600 seconds]
Are you using tor packages f
en tor is launched by /etc/init.d/tor start may be this haven't to be done
manually.
That's all I know about it, hope it will help you to find and correct the
problem !
Best regards,
Julien ROBIN
- Mail original -
De: tor-ad...@torland.me
À: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
Envoyé: Di
https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/tree/doc/TUNING
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 11:39 AM, wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> since I upgraded the torland relay from 2.6.7 to 0.2.7.6 I get the
> following
> warnings:
>
> 09:20:30 [WARN] Failing because we have 4063 connections already. Please
> read
> doc/TUNING
Hi all,
since I upgraded the torland relay from 2.6.7 to 0.2.7.6 I get the following
warnings:
09:20:30 [WARN] Failing because we have 4063 connections already. Please read
doc/TUNING for guidance. [101144347 similar message(s) suppressed in last
21600 seconds]
Google only spits out https://t
> On 22 Jan 2016, at 08:33, pa011 wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> yesterday I got within a minute three times the above warning in my log
> file on Tor 0.2.7.6.
>
> Could somebody please explain to me what it means and how to solve?
Someone tried to login to your control port with the wrong password.
A
Hello,
yesterday I got within a minute three times the above warning in my log
file on Tor 0.2.7.6.
Could somebody please explain to me what it means and how to solve?
Is there a source where I can possibly find answers on this and other
warnings?
Thanks in advance
Paul
___
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/23/2015 09:59 PM, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> If your DirPorts are on port 80, it might even just be a random bad
> person on the Internet who thinks he is attacking webservers, and
> doesn't even know it is Tor.
>
indeed - port 80 here.
> I gu
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 09:38:02AM -0400, Steve Snyder wrote:
> Yes, I got the same thing recently. A burst of 56 of these log entries over
> a 3-minute period on July 21st. Seen with v0.2.6.10.
>
> Somebody shaking doorknobs.
If your DirPorts are on port 80, it might even just be a random bad
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/23/2015 03:38 PM, Steve Snyder wrote:
> Seen with v0.2.6.10.
yep, 0.2.6.10 here too
- --
Toralf, pgp key: 872AE508 0076E94E
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
iF4EAREIAAYFAlWxNL0ACgkQxOrN3gB26U4eBQEAh8Vdxp1dxod0hYpmiCIEPJkV
9jw
Yes, I got the same thing recently. A burst of 56 of these log entries over a
3-minute period on July 21st. Seen with v0.2.6.10.
Somebody shaking doorknobs.
On Thursday, July 23, 2015 8:46am, "Toralf Förster"
said:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 07/23/2015 02:26
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/23/2015 02:26 PM, Pascal Terjan wrote:
> You message seems encrypted with your own key so only you can read it.
Ick, again here just signed :
Got the warnings messages today morning for the first time -I'm just curioius
if somebody else was
On 23 July 2015 at 13:22, Toralf Förster wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
> Charset: utf-8
> Version: GnuPG v2
>
> hQQOA9vCYl42+L0WEBAArg1D4faK3HdxN9Zqql89LPgFAdUVfIuyS+HdMpeHYGcU
[...]
> -END PGP MESSAGE-
You message seems encrypted with your own key so only you can read it.
gpg: en
-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
Charset: utf-8
Version: GnuPG v2
hQQOA9vCYl42+L0WEBAArg1D4faK3HdxN9Zqql89LPgFAdUVfIuyS+HdMpeHYGcU
bHuEAiFA20YWtXTqvEQZ3T1FFCN5tX3psIJdfSUmvIEo8Q8vvK18g2wAiyXUp+aG
Rvm4KLfjVIYVNTO4jc3t9rFiaIhE1OtF9IY41Cr9UPZ4ICkg2Yszvy49F9FVPrjY
vEvu0ng3FIdFVdNTXFg+UZ+qN7Rvv/P2cWlcgLfltE
This morning I rebooted my relay after some patching. I was running 2.6.7
on Ubuntu 14.04.2 LTS from. The server is always a bit slow rebooting but
when it came back up always check the Tor relay and now I see an excessive
amount of these errors:
May 29 12:20:36.000 [warn] Problem bootstrapping. S
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 21.05.2015 13:23, Sharif Olorin wrote:
>> Any idea ? or its normal ?
>
> I'm not sure, but I also saw this for the first time today after
> enabling ipv6 on a relay last week. A quick look at the relevant
> code doesn't shed any immediate light on
Hi people ..
i yesterday started IPV6 but now i see in log following messages periodically
part of my torrc below.
I only add ipv6 lines.
Any idea ? or its normal ?
Thanks
Cmar
ORPort 37.157.192.208:443
ORPort [2a02:2b88:2:1::3a62:1]:9050
## If you want to listen on a port other than the on
> Any idea ? or its normal ?
I'm not sure, but I also saw this for the first time today after
enabling ipv6 on a relay last week. A quick look at the relevant code
doesn't shed any immediate light on what would be causing this (the
triggering request is to establish a rendezvous point with a hidde
reply-to: tor-dev
On Monday 29 September 2014 15:00:29 tor-admin wrote:
> since upgrading torland to 0.2.5.8-rc I see the below warnings. Is this
> something to worry about?
IMHO this might be due to a programming error in the circuit ID selection code
or possibly indicate a DoS attack.
>
Hi,
since upgrading torland to 0.2.5.8-rc I see the below warnings. Is this
something to worry about?
Regards,
torland
--
Sep 28 16:07:24.000 [warn] No unused circIDs found on channel without wide
circID support, with 0 i
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> Occasionally (such as just now) I have seen these two errors in arm:
>
> │ 13:21:25 [WARN] crypto error while checking RSA signature: padding
> check failed (in rsa routines:-
> │ RSA_EAY_PUBLIC_DECRYPT)
> │ 13:21:25 [WARN] crypto err
Occasionally (such as just now) I have seen these two errors in arm:
│ 13:21:25 [WARN] crypto error while checking RSA signature: padding
check failed (in rsa routines:-
│ RSA_EAY_PUBLIC_DECRYPT)
│ 13:21:25 [WARN] crypto error while checking RSA signature: block
type is not 01 (in rsa routine
On 2/21/14, grarpamp wrote:
>> something I did to ntpd.conf (probably adding servers above the
>> default debian entries which are:
>> server 0.debian.pool.ntp.org iburst
>
> The order doesn't matter. Though if DNS is not up before
> ntpd on boot, specified poolnames won't resolve and I think it's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Andreas Krey:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 22:02:21 +, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>> My tor logs (running on Debian) are showing this warning: [WARN]
>> Your system clock just jumped 100 seconds forward; assuming
>> established circuits no longer work.
>
> I've now gone and added some ntp servers from telstra, iinet and ntp.org.
> Good. Well now I have a number of ntp servers listed, hopefully it
> shall improve the situation.
I don't think ntpd has an option yet to autoreplace bad servers from
DNS pools via future DNS queries. Either way all that
On 2/20/14, grarpamp wrote:
>>> - configure tor to syslog
>>
>> added
>
> 'Log syslog'
The example in etc/torrc is 'Log notice syslog' which I uncommented.
>>> - send an ntpdate -q pool to syslog every 5min,
>>> remove when solved.
>>
>> Do you mean disable ntpd daemon, and run this instead? So
>> - configure tor to syslog
>
> added
'Log syslog'
>> - send an ntpdate -q pool to syslog every 5min,
>> remove when solved.
>
> Do you mean disable ntpd daemon, and run this instead? Sounds easy
> enough, I imagine:
> service ntp stop; while true; do ntpd -gqn -l /var/log/syslog; sleep 5m; don
On 2/20/14, grarpamp wrote:
> Since you say it repeats you oppurtunity to check the
> system clock first:
> - configure tor to syslog
added
> - send an ntpdate -q pool to syslog every 5min,
> remove when solved.
Do you mean disable ntpd daemon, and run this instead? Sounds easy
enough, I imagi
Since you say it repeats you oppurtunity to check the
system clock first:
- configure tor to syslog
- send an ntpdate -q pool to syslog every 5min,
remove when solved.
- send *.* to /var/log/all
and see what you find around where the date lines
start to slide or jump past each other. Graph it
wit
On 2/19/14, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On 2/19/14, Alexander Makarov wrote:
>> Could you show the log?
>
> Current and previous tor logs attached. What is also interesting is IP
> address seems to change rather frequently from the ISP (iiNet in this
> case - a home ADSL2 connection, but off-net, s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Yea, maybe you will find something strange or regular
On 19.02.2014 10:59, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On 2/19/14, Alexander Makarov wrote:
>> On 18.02.2014 23:39, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>>> On 2/18/14, Alexander Makarov wrote:
On 18.02.2014 22:02
Iinet are having some sort of problem this morning which was just resolved a
short while ago.
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
On 2/19/14, Alexander Makarov wrote:
> On 18.02.2014 23:39, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>> On 2/18/14, Alexander Makarov wrote:
>>> On 18.02.2014 22:02, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
My tor logs (running on Debian) are showing this warning:
[WARN] Your system clock just jumped 100 seconds forward;
On 2/18/14, D.S. Ljungmark wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>> My tor logs (running on Debian) are showing this warning:
>> [WARN] Your system clock just jumped 100 seconds forward; assuming
>> established circuits no longer work.
>>
>> I tried running openntpd as
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 22:02:21 +, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> My tor logs (running on Debian) are showing this warning:
> [WARN] Your system clock just jumped 100 seconds forward; assuming
> established circuits no longer work.
It may just be that your machine completely hangs for a while
occasiona
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Could you show the log? Can you rebuild you kernel with debug option and
check what kernel events have the same timestamps
On 18.02.2014 23:39, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On 2/18/14, Alexander Makarov wrote:
>> On 18.02.2014 22:02, Zenaan Harkness wrot
Are you on a virtual machine? Do you control the VM host? If not, it could
be that your host is migrating your VM, or not scheduling it properly,
which causes time drifts inside the VM.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> My tor logs (running on Debian) are showing this
I was told by a network engineer that recently there have been attacks
targetting ntp.
It may or may not have anything to do with your relay though.
Robert
>
> My tor logs (running on Debian) are showing this warning:
> [WARN] Your system clock just jumped 100 seconds forward; assuming
> establ
On 2/18/14, Alexander Makarov wrote:
> On 18.02.2014 22:02, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>> My tor logs (running on Debian) are showing this warning:
>> [WARN] Your system clock just jumped 100 seconds forward; assuming
>> established circuits no longer work.
>>
>> I tried running openntpd as well as nt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Maybe problem with hardware clocks?
On 18.02.2014 22:02, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> My tor logs (running on Debian) are showing this warning:
> [WARN] Your system clock just jumped 100 seconds forward; assuming
> established circuits no longer work.
>
My tor logs (running on Debian) are showing this warning:
[WARN] Your system clock just jumped 100 seconds forward; assuming
established circuits no longer work.
I tried running openntpd as well as ntp packages (debian), and both
display the same problem - once or twice a day I get this jump in ti
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Samuel Walker
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've started receiving this message on my relay (non-exit, non-hidden-serivce)
>
>> [warn] Tried to establish rendezvous on non-OR or non-edge circuit.
>
> I've had a look in the bug tracker, and it looks like it was previously noted
Hi,
I've started receiving this message on my relay (non-exit, non-hidden-serivce)
> [warn] Tried to establish rendezvous on non-OR or non-edge circuit.
I've had a look in the bug tracker, and it looks like it was previously noted
under 4171, with the cause being 4641. Both now fixed.
Should I
Hi,
last night the log of one of my nodes showed within 2 minutes about 160 of
these messages. Traffic stats show that the incoming bandwidth increased from
the average of 300 Mbit/s to more than 400 Mbit/s, where at the same time
outgoing traffic dropped. From the peak I see, the requests must
71 matches
Mail list logo
