On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 11:54:00 +
nusenu wrote:
> communicating with OVH regarding relays without contactinfo added to the
> network.
Is it *really* a good idea to poke OVH over this?
Basically it's trying to imply that running Tor should be OK, but running Tor
"improperly" (per your own speci
Hello,
There seems to be an issue with Tor's memory usage.
Earlier today, with Tor 3.5.7 and 1.5 GB of RAM running two Tor processes, the
machine got 430 MB into swap, slowing down to a crawl from iowait on accessing
the swapped out memory. Typically 1.5 GB is more than enough for these. "VIRT"
in
On Tue, 05 Feb 2019 21:25:00 +
nusenu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> due to some recent and ongoing events related
> to a malicious entity running tor relays
> I'll start to pursue an idea that I had
> for some time: require non-empty ContactInfo
> (non-empty does not mean valid email address)
>
> This
On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 02:57:33 +0500
Roman Mamedov wrote:
> Nicknames are required to be non-empty, did that stop any abuse?
Correction: Nicknames default to "Unnamed" when unset. However did any of the
recent abuse or suspected-malicious relays actually use "Unnamed"? From
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 18:00:21 +
Emilian Ursu wrote:
> What? Rejected from what? Does one have to earn the right
> to commit time and resources for helping the network?
Point is that by running tons of relays without proper MyFamily set, you are
not helping the network, you are actively harmin
On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 21:54:12 -0500
Neel Chauhan wrote:
> I have a Tor relay "NeelTorRelay2":
>
> https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/D5B8C38539C509380767D4DE20DE84CF84EE8299
>
> This relay is hosted on a 300 mbps Verizon FiOS (FTTH/GPON) connection.
> My server is a HPE ProLiant Mic
On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 09:06:05 -0500
Neel Chauhan wrote:
> Verizon gives both 300 mbps upload and download speeds. Uploads are more
> heavily oversubscribed on FiOS, primarily because GPON gives 2.5gbps
> downloads and 1.25gbps uploads.
But then again the upload will be barely utilized by typica
On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 13:05:47 -0500
Neel Chauhan wrote:
> Being capped at 200 Mbps was because `powerd` wasn't enabled on my
> FreeBSD, and "turbo" frequencies weren't being used. Enabling `powerd`
> means I feel my relay can handle 300 Mbps (and CPU usage dropped because
> the clock speed incr
On Fri, 1 Mar 2019 11:54:31 +1000
teor wrote:
> > I'd love that too -- but the thing I am thinking now is how to address
> > the temporary addresses that are used in operating systems (in some my
> > default, in some not by default)? Those addresses change over time
> > randomly, and maybe more o
On Fri, 05 Apr 2019 18:02:08 +0200
li...@for-privacy.net wrote:
> If your hoster is not in Rwanda or something, 1Gbit is normal nowadays.
*Unmetered* 1 Gbit though (and both ways), not really.
--
With respect,
Roman
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-rel
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 22:14:43 +0200
li...@for-privacy.net wrote:
> Yeah, I tested it once. (Intel XEON E3-1270 v2 + 32GB RAM)
> NumCPUs not set: tor runs with 8 threads. With NumCPUs=2: only with 2
> threads.
It does, but it still isn't able to split the load into 8 threads evenly at
the moment.
On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 01:46:19 +0300
s7r wrote:
> I totally agree. But why would you want to advertise an IPv6 ORPort if
> your Tor daemon only truly has IPv4 socket? This is what I don't
> understand. Why would one want that? Just to look neat in the consensus?
It is supported to advertise an IPv
On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:43:33 +
to...@protonmail.com wrote:
> I need to move to a new router, which, unlike the old Verizon home router,
> doesn't have a quick DMZ host to which I attach the tor telay's local ip
> address. So I think I need to do port forwarding, and for that what rules do
On Sat, 04 May 2019 22:39:32 +
amytain wrote:
> Would it be possible to support gre tunneling for the inbound IP for the exit
> and outbound ips?
Does your browser or your web server "support GRE tunneling"?
If you set up a tunnel in your OS, then naturally you can send/receive IP
protocol
On Wed, 15 May 2019 22:26:25 -0700
Keifer Bly wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> So I am starting a new middle relay using a VPS hosted on Google Cloud
> running Debian. though the relay is running, it is not appearing in the
> consensus after 10 hours. Here is the tor log, any thoughts on what is
> going on
On Wed, 29 May 2019 17:58:10 -0400
Neel Chauhan wrote:
> For those who have middle relays on their home broadband connection (not
> bridge or exit), both on Verizon FiOS and other ISPs regardless of
> country or technology, please test for if Verizon.com is blocked.
Yes it is blocked from all
On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 13:39:43 -0400
Matt Traudt wrote:
> 100 Megabits per second is a reasonable RBR setting for a reasonable
> relay.
Most likely though you don't want to be running a 100 Mbit/sec relay on Google
Cloud, as their bandwidth pricing is outrageous, starting at $85 per TB:
https://clo
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 16:31:34 +1000
teor wrote:
> If you add tor-experimental-0.4.0.x-stretch, then you will upgrade to
> 0.4.0 now.
>
> If you keep the stretch line, you will automatically stay with the latest
> version, even when tor-experimental-0.4.0.x-stretch goes away.
>
> We haven't updat
Hello,
As sometimes happens, I notice my nodes getting into swap heavily.
This time:
KiB Mem: 1010576 total, 897388 used, 113188 free, 5144 buffers
KiB Swap: 1048572 total, 123592 used, 924980 free.61732 cached Mem
PID USER PR NIVIRTRESSHR S
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 01:49:18 -0400
starlight.201...@binnacle.cx wrote:
> Tor consumes substantial skbuf memory in the kernel, which
> accounts for some of the difference in reported size for
> VmRSS and VmSize and total memory consumption.
This reminded me that I had these tweaks applied (as on a
On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 01:32:59 +
"Matt Westfall" wrote:
> Just set your exit relay DNS to 8.8.8.8 and 1.1.1.1 I mean dns traffic
> isn't bulk traffic, let google and CloudFlare do the "work"
It is considered to be a bad idea privacy-wise:
https://medium.com/@nusenu/who-controls-tors-dns-traff
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 02:23:21 +
Alec Larsen wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've only recently joined this list, so I apologise in advance if this is not
> the appropriate place for my question.
>
> For the past month, I have been operating an exit node (
> 89094DFA4158C7A1583EC3A332CDCBC74A28CC0E ) f
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 00:46:50 +
Christopher Sheats wrote:
> Tor Project, please increase your #IPv6 awareness/outreach similar to how
> ARIN and the other RIRs try very hard to do.
Before outreach Tor would need some actual IPv6 support, as in using it for
the actual traffic of relay-to-relay
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 21:23:03 +1000
teor wrote:
> Your relay's IPv6 address is not reachable from the directory authorities:
> https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/CE5ED345398CC02D573347C2F238F80B18E680EE
>
> All 6 directory authorities on IPv6 can't reach your relay on IPv6:
> https://
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:07:21 +
"Matt Westfall" wrote:
> So perhaps your ISP is wonking with tor traffic as suggested.
We happened to meet in a Telegram group chat and after some more discussion
the cause turned out to be firewall rules on the relay machine itself.
--
With respect,
Roman
__
On Thu, 05 Sep 2019 02:11:00 +
Mike Perry wrote:
> 1. "I didn't know that Debian's backports repo has latest-stable Tor!"
I only looked to backports when I get a warning on the metrics website that my
versions are not recommended. Aside from that, I thought that running LTS on
relays is actu
On Fri, 06 Sep 2019 02:20:00 +
Mike Perry wrote:
> >> 2. "I didn't see the Tor Project repos mentioned in Tor's Relay docs!"
> >
> > I was using them in the past, but then decided not to, as it's adding some
> > management overhead and also one more potential security weakpoint.
>
> These t
On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 20:20:06 +1000
teor wrote:
> > As with adding any third-party repository, it means trusting the repository
> > provider to install and run any root-privilege code on the machine. In case
> > the repository server (or actually the release process, including signing)
> > is
> >
On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 00:00:10 +0200
niftybunny wrote:
> $ traceroute6 2a01:4f8:1c0c:45f7::1
> connect: No route to host
IIRC you would only get such output if you run this on a machine which doesn't
have any IPv6 itself. Did you check from a wrong one?
The actual result (confirming the IP is un
On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 20:43:12 +0100
Olaf Grimm wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I repeatedly try to install Tor under Debian Buster and fail again at
> key import.
> With the last system I found the solution by activating the
> "Experimental repos" under Debian. This time it didn't work and I kept
> looking.
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 13:30:48 -0500
Neel Chauhan wrote:
> After having my Primcast.com dedicated server suspended, I signed up for
> a dedicated server from Psychz Networks in their Dallas location to run
> a FreeBSD-powered Tor exit relay.
>
> https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/9B6
On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 00:58:36 -0500
Matt Corallo wrote:
> BBA should handle random packet loss much better than, eg, Cubic.
Do you mean BBR? https://github.com/google/bbr
In my experience it does work very well on Tor relays, and also on servers in
general (keeping in mind that these TCP congesti
On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 16:24:56 +
Matt Corallo wrote:
> Cool! What did your testing rig look like?
A few years ago I've got a dedicated server from one of these cheap French
hosts, which appeared to have a congested uplink (low-ish upload speeds).
Since the support was not able to solve this, b
On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 21:23:00 +
nusenu wrote:
> > I already knew that not all of my relays have a correct MyFamily setup
> > because as long as i am not sure if they will stay i usually dont
> > include them in MyFamily because it is a pain to edit every torrc
>
> Yes, manually managing MyFam
On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:17:48 +0300
Станислав wrote:
>
>
> 12.03.2020, 23:36, "Sean Greenslade" :
> >>> What are the contents of /etc/resolv.conf ?
> >>
> >> 127.0.0.1
> >> ::1
> >
> > That's the problem. The format of resolv.conf requires the string
> > "nameserver" before each ip. Try someth
On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:53:25 +0300
armik...@gmail.com wrote:
> С уважением,
> Станислав
I'm not sure if trailing dot is allowed in the "search" directive. Can you try
removing the dot after "lan"? Or just remove the "search" line entirely.
--
With respect,
Roman
On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:22:49 +0300
Станислав wrote:
>
>
> 13.03.2020, 14:55, "teor" :
> Hi,
>
> Post the entire file without shortening or removing any line. If it complains
> about parse error, there must be something wrong in it, but you don't
> noticeor don't think it is wrong. People o
On Tue, 26 May 2020 12:13:39 +
nottryingtobel...@protonmail.com wrote:
> Thank you for the reply. I have one on a Raspberry Pi 3B+ and one on a
> Raspberry Pi 4. I believe both are 64-bit ARM.
If you use Raspbian, that's still a 32-bit OS, which means what Tor people said
about dropping 32-b
On Mon, 08 Jun 2020 23:19:37 +
AceOfSpadez79 wrote:
> When setting up a relay, we are told that Tor doesn't scale well beyond dual
> core systems. So with me having a 6 core CPU, is there a way to sandbox my
> relay and restrict system resources to say, at most 2 cores(4 threads) and 2
> gigs
On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 21:12:31 +
dluga...@protonmail.com wrote:
> in the next three days, my VPS provider planning to shutdown
> ("maintenanance") for 6 hours my VPS where tor relay is running (with some
> services).
>
> I suspect that my VPS will be copied and reviewed (by not authorized per
On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:17:24 +0200
nusenu wrote:
> > What is the advantage over the torrc config value "MyFamily" ?
>
> MyFamily is somewhat orthogonal to the idea behind the verifyurl field.
Still not getting what advantage do you propose to ones who choose to also
maintain the latter.
It re
On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 22:42:02 +0200
Sebastian Elisa Pfeifer wrote:
> Hey,
> so one of my relays [0] dropped all traffic. Tor Metrics says its down
> for 4 days now, but "last restarted" correctly states today at 19:06.
> Also, on the metrics page is has the flags Fast, Guard, Running, Stable,
> V2D
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 11:41:52 +0100
mick wrote:
> Hi Guys
>
> I today received notification from DO that they have changed their
> Terms of Service and Acceptable Useage policies. Having read those
> changed notices it is clear to me that DO are no longer really Tor
> friendly. They do not allow
On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:20:02 +0100
mick wrote:
> The new ToS says:
>
> "5.6 As a reward for being early adopters of the Services, some Users
> with older Accounts received free bandwidth promotions contingent on
> their Accounts remaining operative, in good standing, and in compliance
> with thi
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:36:48 +0200
Toralf Förster wrote:
> On 10/17/20 6:30 AM, John Csuti wrote:
> > Interesting I’ll have to look into that. I am giving both IPv4 and IPv6 so
> > that could be the issue.
> Should work, maybe you need NoAdvertise, eg.:
>
>
> # torrc
> #
> PIDFile /var/run/tor
On Wed, 28 Oct 2020 06:53:56 +
shsmbcfdfk wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I setup a non-exit relay on my home network and I have been listed as relay.
> So now me and my family even if we don't use Tor we are excluded from some
> online services.
>
> Beyond the discussion of whether the owners of these
On Sun, 8 Nov 2020 22:21:00 -
"Dr Gerard Bulger" wrote:
> Worried about dominance of OVH for relays and exits? How about Google!
> Setting up a fast server is SO cheap on their https://cloud.google.com/
> platform, it is tempting to set up relays, if not exits there. Looking at
> their T
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 10:52:47 -0800
Keifer Bly wrote:
> I am wondering, are relays being ddosed a normal thing? Thank you.
> --Keifer
DDoS'ing opponents in an argument is common on some IRC networks, so it could
have to do with the IRC exiting that you allow.
I don't remember relays on their own
On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 16:54:50 +0100
Casper wrote:
> I found a "kind of solution" about that.
>
> Behind my fibre optique, I took 26000-26999 tcp ports with the NAT for
> IPv4
>
> so I have 1 relay using pop3/pop3s for IPv4/IPv6, and many "little"
> relays on the range 26000-26999 for IPv4/IPv6.
On Wed, 24 Mar 2021 20:06:48 -0600
Jeffrey Cliff wrote:
> I've been running a relay/exit node for many years. Tor user since ~2004.
> To the extent that my voice means anything at all here, I would like to
> strongly condemn the Tor project joining the attempt to cancel Richard
> Stallman. Stal
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:44:54 +
William Kane wrote:
> "The group recently reappointed the controversial developer and
> activist to its board; he had previously departed in the wake of
> sexual-harassment allegations and comments he made about the Jeffrey
> Epstein case that many found repelle
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 11:26:16 -0400
Chris Dagdigian wrote:
> telling new female undergrads and grad students to ensure that they never,
> ever, were placed in a room alone with him.
It is a bad idea to stay alone in a room with a woman these days, regardless :)
Rumours or accusations of harassme
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 01:13:56 +
Андрей Гвоздев wrote:
> Did anyone run relays on Scaleway?
Scaleway is the new name of Online SAS, a lot of people run relays there
(#3 most popular AS) -- for that reason it is actually kind of discouraged to
add more.
If you already have a server there for s
On Sun, 25 Jul 2021 08:36:20 -0500
Kathi wrote:
> Hi -
>
> I'm running three relays. Is it necessary to list all three relays in
> my family on each relay?
Hello,
Technically it is necessary to list "the other two" on each relay.
But listing all three on all three is also allowed, and is
On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 20:04:11 +0200
Sebastian Hahn wrote:
> I operate gabelmoo and your relay seems to be unreachable via IPv6 from here.
> Here's a traceroute:
Ping and traceroute to that IP don't reach for me either, from anywhere*, but
TCP connection to port 443 works. Perhaps you could reche
On Thu, 04 Nov 2021 21:55:02 +
potlatch via tor-relays wrote:
> Wondering if my tor.list has a typo since I can't upgrade Tor 0.4.5.9. I get
> error:
> Err:1 https://deb.torproject.org/torproject.org stretch/main amd64
> tor-geoipdb all 0.4.5.10-1~d9.stretch+1
> server certificate verifi
On Thu, 11 Nov 2021 21:52:22 +
potlatch via tor-relays wrote:
> Hello All,
> My VPS host recently moved one of my Tor exits to cloud ops (I believe AWS).
> Since that time the instance will not function as an exit. Torcc and keys
> are as before. I was operating on Ubuntu 21.04 but reloaded t
On Tue, 28 Dec 2021 21:39:27 +0100 (CET)
abuse--- via tor-relays wrote:
> why would that be needed? Linux has a pretty good thread scheduler imo and
> will shuffle loads around as needed.
To improve cache locality, as in modern CPUs L1/L2/L3 cache is partitioned
into various schemes per core or
On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 14:40:07 +
Tor Geheimschreiber wrote:
> Not sure if this is the correct list on which to ask but a new node
> created just over 7 days ago is now
>
> being shown on Tor Metrics (atlas.torproject.org) as being down. However
> local logs show heartbeat
>
> activity and so
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 19:58:49 -0700
David Fifield wrote:
> > On the matter of onion key rotation, I had the idea of making the onion key
> > files read-only. Roger did some source code investigation and said that it
> > might work to prevent onion key rotation, with some minor side effects. I
>
On Wed, 25 May 2022 19:31:41 -0500
Thoughts wrote:
> For a non-exit relay, is "NumCPUs 2" still the recommended maximum?
> Running on a quad core and recently saw a message indicating I had
> insufficient CPU power to support the desired number of connections...
I'm not sure why would it be
On Fri, 27 May 2022 13:11:06 -0500
Thoughts wrote:
> It was my impression from reading some older documents that tor didn't
> multithread well.
Indeed it does not. But there's no need to hard-cap it to 2 CPUs via config,
unless the plan is that multi-instance scenario with 2 cores per instance.
201 - 262 of 262 matches
Mail list logo
