Re: [tor-relays] AWS abuse handling

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 21:07:39 +0200 Markus Koch wrote: > Okay, I knew I am not a normal person with over a petabyte a months across > all my servers but seriously what service can you run on a vps with 15 gigz a > month? Well for example you could run some IRC or IM related service, or somethi

Re: [tor-relays] AWS abuse handling

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:09:12 +0100 "Louie Cardone-Noott" wrote: > Am I right in thinking that even 2 TByte/month is fairly low? That's > only 6 Mbit/s average (whether that's 6/6 or 3/3 depends on their > accounting I suppose). That's correct, however I don't have any unmetered offers to recomme

Re: [tor-relays] cheap unmetered non-exit VPS offers

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 15:30:02 +0200 Markus Koch wrote: > Just chatted with the Support and I highly doubt they are knowing what > they are doing, anyway setup one exit relay and will report back after > my first abuse mail. This will be fun :) > > btw: > Jul 28 15:24:19.832 [warn] Failed to parse

Re: [tor-relays] outgooing UDP flooding on middle relay

On Mon, 1 Aug 2016 14:28:04 +0200 pa011 wrote: > Hello, > > one of my middle relays got auto limited by the ISP because of > "outgooing UDP flooding ". > > The VPS is pure debian8, fail2ban, pub key and nothing else installed - > so I highly doubt the give reason for the traffic limitation. > A

Re: [tor-relays] High speed Tor relay advice

On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 20:57:13 -0400 George wrote: > > Alternately, run ntpdate via cron every few hours, to avoid running > > an unnecessary network service. (Recent security issues in ntp remain > > unpatched in some distributions.) > > There's actually a technical problem with running ntpdate p

Re: [tor-relays] High speed Tor relay advice

On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 02:35:49 -0400 grarpamp wrote: > On 8/14/16, i3 wrote: > > My new server has 10Gb/s connection (I've observed it at 900MB/s to the > > drives > > Depending on whether you meant MiB/s or MB/s, > you may find your network calculations off by 350Mbps, To me these seem to be j

Re: [tor-relays] Pi3 mid relay dropping lil bit of packets

On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 20:08:31 +0200 Pi3 wrote: > Hello, > I just started running my little 5 mbits mid relay on Pi3 on raspbian and all > seems to be dandy, > it picked traffic nicely, hovering around 700-800 total connections, > its not unusual to see it pushing full advertised bandwidth durin

Re: [tor-relays] Tiny computers (RPi-like) for exit nodes?

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 10:40:00 -0600 Michael McConville wrote: > Zack Weinberg wrote: > > Has anyone had any experience running *exit* nodes on Raspberry > > Pi-grade hardware, or slightly beefier? We are thinking of replacing > > the old, bulky, power-hungry machine currently running exit > > 78C

Re: [tor-relays] Why can't I see more traffic? (is my banana too weak?)

On Sat, 03 Sep 2016 16:53:25 +0200 Aeris wrote: > > Could it be that it is due to the quite slow hardware, even though I know > > that it is able to push more traffic? > > Yep, surely. > > You currently push 3Mbps of traffic, which is correct for this kind of > hardware. > All "cheap" hardware

Re: [tor-relays] DigitalOcean pricing (Re: tomhek - the (new) biggest guard relay operator)

On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 15:26:05 + "Admin Kode-IT" wrote: > It's like you're running a Rasperry Pi 1 with an SSD and a good Network for > 5$/month. From my quick testing a DO droplet provides at least 6 times faster CPU than a Raspberry Pi 1, and more likely closer to 10-20x faster in real worl

Re: [tor-relays] Node families and guard flags

On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 19:39:07 +0200 Ralph Seichter wrote: > On 15.09.2016 18:40, Markus Koch wrote: > > > 100% normal. Welcome to tor. > > No, no clue why ;) > > I was contemplating possible security considerations behind this. One > particular person or organization responsible for the adminis

Re: [tor-relays] Node families and guard flags

On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:34:54 +0200 Ralph Seichter wrote: > On 15.09.16 19:43, Roman Mamedov wrote: > > > It is normal to run multiple nodes in one family and have most or all > > of them get the Guard flag. > > I don't see this happen. I would think that weeks of

Re: [tor-relays] Guard/Middle/Exit Hosting

On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 22:41:41 +0200 Markus Koch wrote: > You are welcome :) > > JUST A NOTE: TRAFFIC IS F R E E and UNLIMITED. You don't have to worry > about the $20/TB at all. ATM! This can chance anytime but atm the > traffic is FREE! Use is, there are lots of high traffic tor nodes out > ther

Re: [tor-relays] "Potentially dangerous relay groups"

On Tue, 27 Sep 2016 21:24:59 +0200 Tim Semeijn wrote: > Always watching my ass to be a good old Tor operator, I got my nodes on > the list. Always fun to see how one time not updating all your > MyFamily's gets you marked for life xD > > Time for some conf-updating. To possibly simplify this a

Re: [tor-relays] "Potentially dangerous relay groups"

On Wed, 28 Sep 2016 02:38:37 -0400 grarpamp wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Roman Mamedov wrote: > > *) Give up on listing fingerprints, instead simply list nicknames. > > No. Fingerprints are what to use here. Please do not use nicknames. Any actual rationale, othe

Re: [tor-relays] "Potentially dangerous relay groups"

On Wed, 28 Sep 2016 11:53:51 +0500 Roman Mamedov wrote: > The only problem I can imagine with this is that Nefarious People can run a same nickname relay * -- With respect, Roman pgp6uN5Itqc5L.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___

Re: [tor-relays] "Potentially dangerous relay groups"

On Wed, 28 Sep 2016 11:41:16 +0200 Ralph Seichter wrote: > Key fingerprints are technically much closer to being IDs than nicknames, > which are nothing but short strings that can - and do - change at a whim. We're talking MyFamily, so it's you who is in control of all the nicknames, and it's on

Re: [tor-relays] Dealing with OVH Abuse Complaints

On Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:55:26 +1100 teor wrote: > Does anyone have experience running a long-lived Exit on OVH / So You Start? > > We've just received a threat to shut down our OVH Exit due to abuse > complaints. > We were responding to these automated reports (mainly SSH brute force) with > tem

Re: [tor-relays] RPi Relay Maximum Speed

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 07:18:56 +0200 Manny wrote: > I have a 1gbit symmetric connection at home and would like to donate > 100mbit with my raspberry pi 3 model b. Since it has a 100mbit Network > Interface, I'm limited to that anyways. > > What Settings do I Need in my torcc to get the Maximum S

Re: [tor-relays] RPi Relay Maximum Speed

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 07:20:25 -0500 Tristan wrote: > Remember, a relay has to download and upload as well, so your 100Mbps link > would really only be able to _relay_ at 50Mbps anyway. The OP mentioned they have "1gbit symmetric connection at home", i.e. 1000 Mbit in, 1000 out. Whether or not th

Re: [tor-relays] Smallest, cheapest, lightest computer for tor relay

On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 01:01:06 +0200 diffusae wrote: > Yes, you are right. That doesn't make a real big difference. Yes it does make a real big difference. Get the Pi 3, the 1st Pi is an order of magnitude slower. > The RPi is good to use as relay with your requirement. You can expect a > total t

Re: [tor-relays] DNS resolving -problem?

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:58:38 +0200 pa011 wrote: > apt-get install dnsmasq > > /etc/resolv.conf > nameserver 127.0.0.1 > > /etc/dnsmasq.conf > server=216.87.84.211 #open.nic us > server=84.200.69.80 #dns.watch us > server=84.200.70.40 #dns.watch us > server=194.1

Re: [tor-relays] manual vs. automated updates

On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:53:19 +0200 Markus Koch wrote: > I was talking about the bridges you can see on the screen shot. These > were my "backup" Digital Ocean accounts because Digital Ocean kicked > my exits after 2-3 months. Digital Ocean is not allowing any exits > anymore so I use the prepaid

Re: [tor-relays] is it possible to relay using ipv6?

On Mon, 28 Nov 2016 10:01:03 +1100 teor wrote: > (I've rearranged your threads for clarity, please bottom-post in future.) > > >> On Nov 27, 2016 11:59 AM, "root" >> > wrote: > >> > >>It is end 2016 we should change from must have IPv4 to must have > >>IPv6 and

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 20:47:17 - "Alan" wrote: > Thanks for that, I've made changes to both torrc files. > I've added MyFamily with each others finger print like so: > MyFamily E856ABA2020AA9C483CC2D9B4C878D8D948B0887 You don't need to only list the other one(s) in each MyFamily, you could simp

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 22:00:20 +0100 diffusae wrote: > Well, I can read and also now the translation from Bits to Bytes. > But I am not sure about your value of the maximum network capacity. > > That's the iperf3 measurement of a Raspberry Pi 1 Model B+: > > [ ID] Interval Transfer B

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 00:36:15 + Duncan Guthrie wrote: > My original figure may have been... somewhat off. With different models > they may have updated the network hardware. They did not. All models with Ethernet use the same SMSC LAN9514 chip. > A more general point is that old desktop comp

Re: [tor-relays] relays with dynamic IP - here Rasp2

On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 11:02:59 +0200 "Rana" wrote: > >> Wow nice bandwidth you are pushing through Paul! You mean two Raspi 2's > >> sharing an Internet connection, each relaying 27 Gbytes per day at 5.4 > >> Mbit/s on the average?? Total 10.8 Mbit/s?? Or 2.7 Mbit/s each? > > > > It is just 1 sin

Re: [tor-relays] relays with dynamic IP - here Rasp2

On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 11:13:54 +0200 "Rana" wrote: > But is it possible to tell Tor on which cores to run? I mean, install a 2nd > instance of Tor and tell it to run on the two cores not used by the first > instance? The Linux kernel will sort it out automatically. Deciding optimally which programs

Re: [tor-relays] Exploiting firmware

On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 22:50:39 + Alex Haydock wrote: > Intel ME/AMT concerns me too, especially how unavoidable it seems to be > on modern CPUs (AMD is no escape, as they have an equivalent in the form > of their "Platform Security Processor"). On AMD that's been implemented only after "Family

Re: [tor-relays] EOMA68 as a platform for trustworthy computing? / was: Exploiting firmware

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 12:11:48 +0100 Christian Pietsch wrote: > On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 10:41:46AM +0500, Roman Mamedov wrote: > > On AMD that's been implemented only after "Family 15h" > > https://libreboot.org/faq/#amdbastards > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wik

Re: [tor-relays] Exploiting firmware

On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 04:17:49 -0500 grarpamp wrote: > >> Intel ME/AMT concerns me too > > > AMD Family 15h itself is safe. > > No one has any proof of that for any modern cpu from any > maker, featureset irrelavant. Sure, to clarify what's meant here is "it does not implement the actual backdoor

Re: [tor-relays] Tor Relay on ARM server Marvell Armada 370/XP

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:47 +0100 "Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) - lists" wrote: > Hello, > > i'm experimenting Tor setup on very cheap servers from scaleaway.com > that run a quad-core ARM Marvell Armada 370/XP servers but have > unlimited bandwidth. > > Those are Soc platform: > http://natisbad.o

Re: [tor-relays] Tor Relay on ARM server Marvell Armada 370/XP

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 18:19:06 +0100 niftybunny wrote: > Yes, running 12 exits there. > > https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/28F4F392F8F19E3FBDE09616D9DB8143A1E2DDD3 > > > > the atom cpu suxx, install 2 instance

Re: [tor-relays] Report of home relay experience (cont'd)

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 19:12:54 +0100 Petrusko wrote: > Haaa extra packages needed to compile from source... > I don't remember which ones ! If someone here knows ? :s > Try running "apt-get build-dep tor". -- With respect, Roman ___ tor-relays mailing

Re: [tor-relays] TOR Relay performance issue

On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:55:12 +0100 Thomas Maurice wrote: > It is supposed to be caped at 20MBps, and 25MBps burst so I doubt the > limitation I am observing is enforced by the node itself. You mean traffic limitation in torrc? Remove it. There is no reason to apply bandwidth caps unless you want

Re: [tor-relays] FW: What's a "useful" mailing list contributor? (was Re: What's a "useful" relay?)

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:09:27 +0200 "Rana" wrote: > Wow. I offer to maintain a FAQ for small relays and in return I get this. > Unsubscribed. Those were all reasonable requests laid out in a clear and polite fashion. If you don't want to follow etiquette of a community, never listen and instead

Re: [tor-relays] Network is unreachable?

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 03:40:05 + John Ricketts wrote: > It is entirely possible this is a result of the HE vs Cogent feud, big break > in the IPv6 routing tables as a cogent is refusing to peer with HE. Not sure > where they are in that negotiation... Any basis for that in this case? Other

Re: [tor-relays] why my exit is not being used?

On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 15:12:46 +1100 teor wrote: > Your relay also does not seem capable of handling much tor traffic, so > tor clients are being told not to use it: That's the usual problem of relays in Asia (Singapore in this case), with all the bandwidth measuring authority servers being too fa

Re: [tor-relays] why my exit is not being used?

On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 23:46:31 +0800 "gustavo panizzo (gfa)" wrote: > Would make sense then to run another tor instance in the same server? It nearly always does (unless on just a single very slow CPU core), so yes. Although you might start running out of RAM if you run that on a 512 MB droplet.

Re: [tor-relays] New Relay Operator: Hostname

On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 21:16:38 -0800 co...@awakening.io wrote: > I would like the hostname to be public, I wonder if I have misconfigured > as the hostname does not display here: > > https://torstatus.blutmagie.de/router_detail.php?FP=b0a8f23372309d3589e70bd3c2e48c5b6fc3ec36 > > I have the followi

Re: [tor-relays] What kind of hardware do I need for my relay

On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 21:03:57 + Farid Joubbi wrote: > Intel NUC5CPYH Celeron N3050 1,6 GHz to 2,16 burst -> 5 Mbit/s max (OpenBSD) This sounds wrong. VIA Nano 1.6GHz, a single core laptop CPU from 2011, can sustain about 40+40 Mbit (WITHOUT utilizing the crypto acceleration). The Celeron N30

Re: [tor-relays] Tor version on Debian Wheezy (oldstable)

On Wed, 17 May 2017 11:32:39 -0400 Matt Traudt wrote: > You could tell Debian to get Tor from torproject.org > > https://www.torproject.org/docs/debian.html.en > > You'd probably tell it you use old stable and want Tor version stable. > After a couple of apt commands, I predict you will end up

Re: [tor-relays] Tor version on Debian Wheezy (oldstable)

On Wed, 17 May 2017 18:36:12 -0400 Roger Dingledine wrote: > My guess is that our fine debian maintainer is leaving it at 0.2.9.10 > while Stretch finishes its freeze and goes stable: > https://wiki.debian.org/DebianStretch I don't mean packages in the Debian official repo, but those at deb.tor

Re: [tor-relays] Memory Problems with tor releay - restart tor automatically after failure

On Thu, 25 May 2017 08:54:00 + nusenu wrote: > I noticed your comment [1] about your plans to write a script that > restarts tor should it get killed. > > I just wanted to let you know that if you have plans to upgrade to > Ubuntu 16.04 you will get this out of the box due to systemd Restart

Re: [tor-relays] [SOLVED] published descriptor missing from consensus

On Thu, 08 Jun 2017 09:43:00 -0500 Scott Bennett wrote: > As noted more than once previously, the pf rules *pass* all traffic > from relay addresses *first*, so that traffic has already gone on to tor > before the block list is applied. There are most likely some relays which use a differen

Re: [tor-relays] sharing tor relay at night or working hours ? make sense ?

On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 09:00:48 -0700 Zalezny Niezalezny wrote: > I thought about it, the best solution for me will be to change Bandwith > settings during working hours using crontab. > > I will prepare two separate configuration files with different Bandwidth > settings and using it, two times pe

Re: [tor-relays] Want to help test 'Sandbox 1'? (Linux only)

On Sun, 25 Jun 2017 18:25:00 + nusenu wrote: > I'm aiming to enable tor's 'Sandbox' feature by default on Debian based > relays starting with the next release of ansible-relayor [1]. > > Before doing so I'd like to collect some feedback from tor relay > operators willing to test this feature

Re: [tor-relays] Load balancing (with IPVS) multiple Tor daemons

On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 09:54:20 +1000 teor wrote: > Tor uses multithreaded crypto already: depending on the speed of your > processor, you can get up to 400 Mbps per instance (250 Mbps is > typical). In practice I don't remember seeing much more than 120-130% CPU use per process, and even that, only

Re: [tor-relays] 100K circuit request per minute for hours killed my relay

On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 10:24:39 +0100 Pascal Terjan wrote: > Last night for 4h30 (until VPS provider shut it down) one of my middle > relays seems to have got in a bad state where it was using 100% CPU > continuously > > It was not using much bandwidth, about 4MB/s, but reading the logs it > seems

Re: [tor-relays] PSA: Run a Tor node, lose access to Chinese IPs

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 17:13:04 + n...@neelc.org wrote: > Today, I wanted to try to see how the Internet looks behind the Great > Firewall of China. I used a public HTTP proxy list > (http://spys.ru/free-proxy-list/CN/) listing Chinese proxy servers (meaning > getting into Chinese censorship f

Re: [tor-relays] ORSN DNS servers vs OpenNic

On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:18:23 +0200 niftybunny wrote: > I use: > > nameserver 204.152.184.76 > nameserver 194.150.168.168 > nameserver 213.73.91.35 > nameserver 8.8.8.8 > > works fine. Google as gateway of last resort :) A common gotcha, only the first three will be used, the rest are apparently

Re: [tor-relays] HOW-TO: Simple DNS resolver for tor exit operators

On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 16:03:53 -0400 "Dennis Emory Hannon" wrote: > I decided to make a quick starter guide to introduce using a local resolver > for tor-exit node operators. I'd like to solicit some of your feedback on > things that should be added or improved upon. Hopefully this will be a > livin

Re: [tor-relays] Tor exit nodes attacking SSH?

On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 18:51:51 -1100 Mirimir wrote: > On 08/08/2017 01:48 PM, Steven Chamberlain wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I often run my SSH sessions via Tor using tsocks. But today I see: > > > > @@@ > > @WARNING: REMOTE HOST IDEN

Re: [tor-relays] Tor exit nodes attacking SSH?

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 21:08:30 +0100 Alexander Nasonov wrote: > m...@eugenemolotov.ru wrote: > > Make a "trap" ssh server (for example on virtualbox machine > > without any sensitive data) and log in into it through tsocks. > > After that check from which ip it was logged in. This probably > > would

[tor-relays] Force OpenSSL AES-NI usage on a VPS without the AES CPU flag passthrough

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. Many VPS hosts configure their hypervisors in a way that does not have the flag passed through into VPSes, even though all their host nodes surely have CP

Re: [tor-relays] Any IP allocations available out there?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 01:30:13 + (UTC) Paul Templeton wrote: > At the moment there are 50 nodes in Australia with the fastest running at > 357Kbs and only two exit nodes - fastest is 100Kbs. Its a reflection on the > state of politics and the level of service that is provided by ISP's. I feel

Re: [tor-relays] HOW-TO: Simple DNS resolver for tor exit operators

On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 13:43:35 -0700 "Igor Mitrofanov" wrote: > Alternatively, the Tor community could run our own DNS servers, and every > exit node would use those by default. On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:11:23 +0200 (CEST) jpmvtd...@laposte.net wrote: > from the owner of the DNS server. THE owner

Re: [tor-relays] HOW-TO: Simple DNS resolver for tor exit operators

On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 23:28:35 +0200 Ralph Seichter wrote: > On 12.09.17 23:06, Roman Mamedov wrote: > > > Too bad DNS servers are not something a regular person can own, so we > > have to be at mercy of those shady all-knowing uber-powerful Owners > > of the DNS Server

Re: [tor-relays] About relay size

On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 09:53:46 -0400 teor wrote: > > For interposing dual-protocoled nodes along the way, how many do there > > have to be for it to become "not too limiting"? > > This is one of the questions we need researchers to answer. I can't help but feel you are overcomplicating this.

Re: [tor-relays] Just got my first Abuse email :-)

On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 09:38:22 + (UTC) Paul Templeton wrote: > It makes me happy but alas it was forwarded to me by the provider and didn't > include an email address... so now I can not reply, SIGH I believe in such case you are supposed to reply to your provider, usually to indicate that th

Re: [tor-relays] spurios warning about using the nickname instead of the key

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 21:01:55 +0100 (BST) Dylan Issa wrote: > Maybe they're truncated, but they still need to start with a $ If you would just read the manual page, you would gather that $ is optional. > > On 12 October 2017 at 20:09 Sebastian Hahn wrote: > > Hi there, > > On 12. Oct 2017, at

[tor-relays] PSA: exclude /var/lib/tor/diff-cache/ from your backups

Hello, Turns out that dir is highly variable, and judging from the name, also disposable. In my case it was responsible for about 20 GB of churn over a month, i.e. it took 25 GB to keep incremental backups of two Tor nodes with only 2 GB each in root FS (and I was wondering what's going on with m

Re: [tor-relays] [metrics-team] Atlas is now Relay Search!

On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 13:22:00 + nusenu wrote: > > Quick question for you. Atlas used to have the search box at all time in the > > corner which for me was very useful because I could do many search without > > an > > extra click > > +1 Here's another variation on the Atlas theme that I foun

Re: [tor-relays] my IP got blocked

On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 14:45:44 + Nagaev Boris wrote: > dnsbl.info used to provide two tor-related lists: (1) all nodes and (2) exits. > Some webmasters could use the first one by mistake. https://www.dan.me.uk/dnsbl still does, and some webmasters do use the first one. -- With respect, Roman

Re: [tor-relays] DigitalOcean bandwidth billing changes

On Wed, 25 Apr 2018 18:53:56 +0300 pikami wrote: > Does anyone know where I should move my relay? > I can't afford to spend a lot of money, I can only do 5$ a month. There's not a lot of hosts with cheap unmetered bandwidth -- OVH and Online.net come to mind -- and the majority of them is alread

Re: [tor-relays] Info about Provider Scaleway and cheap "ARM server"

On Wed, 02 May 2018 04:20:57 -0400 Artur Pedziwilk wrote: > > https://www.scaleway.com/baremetal-cloud-servers/ > > > > My order was "C1 - A true metal ARM server running in the cloud." > > > > "4 Dedicated ARM Cores, 2GB Memory, 50GB SSD Disk / 200Mbit/s unmetered > > bandwith" > > I think you

Re: [tor-relays] Fwd: Tor Guard Relay

On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 18:18:19 -1100 Mirimir wrote: > Just save that as a text file, and send it to me as an attachment. > > Why the bloody hell someone would target users of this list in that way > is bizarre. And why you? Rather than me, who is admittedly an outspoken > jerk sometimes ;) I got o

[tor-relays] No IPv6 bridges from bridges.torproject.org

Hello, If you select "Do you need IPv6 addresses - Yes", it always results in an error "There aren't any bridges available". No matter if choosing obfs4 or none for the pluggable transport. Is that thing working? There should be at least one available (with obfs4, too), or at least I was under im

Re: [tor-relays] Problem implementing IPv6 and NYX info

Hello, In /etc/network/interfaces you set your IP to >     address 2a06:1700:0:1b:: which is equivalent of 2a06:1700:0:1b:0:0:0:0, or also 2a06:1700:0:1b::0. But then in torrc you use: >     ORPort [2a06:1700:0:1b::1]:9001 From your configs, this is your upstream gateway IP, not IP of your

Re: [tor-relays] [Software Announcement] FamilyGenerator: Tor MyFamily Generator

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 20:29:17 -0400 Neel Chauhan wrote: > Hi tor-relays mailing list, > > I have created a tool called FamilyGenerator. FamilyGenerator is a tool > to automatically construct a Tor MyFamily line based on Onionoo > parameters. If you blindly trust fingerprints fetched "from the

Re: [tor-relays] Non-exit abuse reports

On Sat, 17 May 2014 10:27:39 +0200 dope457 wrote: > Hello, > > I have been running middle relay on my VPS since it was too much trouble > to operate an exit. But ever since I have received two abuse reports > regarding same issue. > > 1) Source: 31.31.78.141 > Event type: DNSANOMALY > Detail:

Re: [tor-relays] relay not receiving very much traffic

On Sun, 18 May 2014 18:59:28 +0200 Markus Klock wrote: > Hello!I deployed a new tor-relay about 2 months ago. It runs on a server with > 2 Quad-cores, 8GB RAM and 1Gbit connection.However, I have still not received > very much traffic to it, it almost never goes above 10Mbit.This is the server

Re: [tor-relays] Confirm IPv6 Setup as Exit Node

On Wed, 21 May 2014 22:51:49 -0700 Adam Brenner wrote: > I have setup a Tor exit node and IPv4 appears to work (will get a real > test in the next 48 hours). I would like to confirm my IPv6 setup as I > have found the documentation on this subject lacking (or my googling > skills suffering!)

Re: [tor-relays] hardening a tor relay

On Sat, 24 May 2014 10:51:52 +0200 David Serrano wrote: > With those ports allowed you'll be able to reach 80% of the network. So you're okay with the thought that their relay will be 20% broken, and 20% of all circuits people try to establish through it, will fail? As Roger said, *all* outgoin

Re: [tor-relays] VPS for tor exit nodes

On Tue, 3 Jun 2014 05:35:16 -0700 (PDT) Contra Band wrote: > Dear exit node operators, > > Could you please recommend vps providers allowing to run tor exit nodes? > > I checked many vps operators but most of them allow relays but not exit nodes > according to AUP or ToS. 1) https://trac.tor

Re: [tor-relays] Spam

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 15:06:44 +0100 kingqueen wrote: > hi, > > well having run a relay for just under 2 weeks, I've got my first spam > on this email address. As you will no doubt have guessed, this is not > my usual email address, it is only used for the Tor relay contact > details, this email l

Re: [tor-relays] Spam

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 21:28:36 +0600 Roman Mamedov wrote: > You put your IP on a web page Sorry, meant "E-Mail address" of course :) -- With respect, Roman signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ tor-relays mailing li

Re: [tor-relays] Spam

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 16:47:49 +0100 kingqueen wrote: > > just tried and easily found your E-Mail using search engines such as Google > > and others. > > Really? kingqu...@btnf.tw ? > https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=kingqueen%40btnf.tw#q=%22kingqueen%40btnf.tw%22 > lists only a Tor node list. A

Re: [tor-relays] One IPv4 address, 1Gbit connection

On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 22:36:10 +1000 Tim wrote: > Tom, > > Why not run multiple tor relays on different ports on the same IPv4 address? > > For example, you could run 6 relays on 6 different ports on your IPv4 address > (6 x 180 Mpbs > 1 Gbps). > > This would also utilise your 4 cores much more

Re: [tor-relays] UK Exit Node

On Sun, 06 Jul 2014 06:06:35 +0100 Michael Banks wrote: > running PeerGuardian on the server in question (blocking > P2P/kiddyporn/hacking related IPs) Thanks for notifying everyone, I hope your BadExit flag is already on its way. -- With respect, Roman signature.asc Description: PGP signat

Re: [tor-relays] CPU usage

On Mon, 07 Jul 2014 21:31:02 +0100 kingqueen wrote: > Hi, I'm running a Tor relay on a low cost dedicated server. > > The tor relay is named kingqueen and it's running on an Intel Atom N2700 dual > core hyperthreaded CPU with 2gb of memory, in a data centre with a symmetric > 100mbps connectio

Re: [tor-relays] CPU usage

On Mon, 7 Jul 2014 23:30:22 -0700 "Asa Rossoff" wrote: > With hyperthreading, I think 4 would be optimal? Yes, 4 can be set, but I remember reading somewhere that Tor doesn't scale well beyond NumCPUs 2 (and poorly even to 2). One way to increase utilization further would be to run a second ins

Re: [tor-relays] CPU usage

On Tue, 8 Jul 2014 09:44:57 -0400 (EDT) "Steve Snyder" wrote: > > ...renice to 10... > > This is good for the Tor process itself, but disadvantages other processes. > If your server is doing name resolution (as an exit node) the resolver may be > impacted, which in turn will hamper handling of

Re: [tor-relays] Google captcha

On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 12:22:06 +0100 kingqueen wrote: > Hello > > Since running a relay, I have frequently had the notice akin to > "Google has detected unusual activity from your computer or network" > and had to do the captcha, when I have connected via the server that > the relay is running on;

Re: [tor-relays] Oubound Ports

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 19:48:06 -0700 "Greg Moss" wrote: > Thanks for the help. I have my ORport and DIRport defined in torrc and > forwarded through the firewall up to the Tor Relay. I was just wondering in > regards to outbound traffic from the server itself. In the event it gets > compromised I r

Re: [tor-relays] Oubound Ports

On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:02:00 +0200 Moritz Bartl wrote: > > However one thing to consider would be to restrict outbound port 22 and > > port 53 > > outbound to not get into trouble with your provider due to suspicions of SSH > > bruteforcing / DNS reflection attacks. This will break a very small

[tor-relays] Auto-detect and enable IPv6 // Re: Please enable IPv6 on your relay!

Hello, > We still have a depressingly low number of relays that support IPv6 > (currently only ~120 of ~1900 relays). If your host supports IPv6, > please enable it, especially if you run an exit! This has to be done > explicitly. If you (supposedly) care so much, then can you please make it auto

Re: [tor-relays] Auto-detect and enable IPv6 // Re: Please enable IPv6 on your relay!

On Fri, 22 May 2015 13:31:02 + Speak Freely wrote: > Uhh, I would like to point out that it would be exceptionally stupid > to have Tor autoconfigure IP addresses, regardless of whether it's > IPv4 or IPv6. On IPv4 it currently does. There is zero rationale as to why IPv6 must be different f

Re: [tor-relays] Bridge Usage and Setup

On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 13:23:34 -0400 (EDT) "Steve Snyder" wrote: > >2) Testing > >How do I (easily) confirm my bridge is correctly configured? > >Especially if I don't have an IPv6 connection for TBB? > > FYI, you can get up to 5 IPv6 addresses for free from Hurricane Electric: > > https://tun

Re: [tor-relays] IPv6 adress valid?

On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 20:12:29 +0200 tor-server-crea...@use.startmail.com wrote: > hi, > is that IPv6 adress valid for example "becks" [2a01:4f8:162:7345::2]? > how do i know if IPv6 is correct and reachable? > thanks Yes this one is correct and reachable. You can check yourself by running on any I

Re: [tor-relays] Multi-core Support

On Tue, 02 Jun 2015 11:13:13 -0400 12xBTM <12x...@gmail.com> wrote: > Improving multi-core support can allow users to saturate high bandwidth > connections with cheaper processors, less setup, and just more efficient > deployment of high-capacity nodes in general. Improving multi-core > support

Re: [tor-relays] Please enable IPv6 on your relay!

On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 20:40:44 +0200 Jesus Cea wrote: > # Declaramos que este nodo TOR es accesible a través de IPv6 > ORPort [::]:PUERTO_TOR You thought it would be this simple. Nope, unlike every other IPv6-capable program on Earth, in Tor this syntax of "bind to all IPs" is not supported. They

Re: [tor-relays] Qualities of a good relay (Sean Saito)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 25 Jun 2015 10:49:30 +0200 nusenu wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > > Wow, thank you all for the suggestions! > > > > Hope to implement these soon. Would definitely appreciate more > > ideas too. > > > If you

Re: [tor-relays] Naive question about consensus weight

On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 14:52:42 +0100 Jonathan Baker-Bates wrote: > So I'm curious as to whether there's anything I can do to bring my > consensus weight up, apart from just ensuring continuous uptime. That's not > often under my control though, since reboots for kernel updates etc. come > quite reg

[tor-relays] Giving away some "pre-warmed" relay keys for adoption

Hello, If anyone is planning to spin up a new VM or dedi to run a Tor relay and want it to be put instantly into good use (without wasting couple of weeks to a month for the whole "unmeasured relay/measured/guard/stable" cycle to complete) or if you are having trouble with your current relay being

Re: [tor-relays] Giving away some "pre-warmed" relay keys for adoption

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 19:47:23 + isis wrote: > I could take those backdoored^W"pre-warmed" keys and put them to good use! Hello, Mkay, I'll get in touch in a few days. As for other repliers, I would not mind explaining my reasoning in more detail, if you have any specific questions or more a

Re: [tor-relays] Giving away some "pre-warmed" relay keys for adoption

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 01:35:10 + Yawning Angel wrote: > The relay identity key is sensitive cryptographic material. Sharing it > means the private key is compromised and is an attempt to subvert: > * The bandwidth scanning process. The consensus weight is the relay's >capacity relative

Re: [tor-relays] Giving away some "pre-warmed" relay keys for adoption

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 05:32:17 +0500 Roman Mamedov wrote: > On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 19:47:23 + > isis wrote: > > > I could take those backdoored^W"pre-warmed" keys and put them to good use! > > Mkay, I'll get in touch in a few days. Hello, I have decided to

Re: [tor-relays] BWauth no-consensus state in effect

On Wed, 5 Aug 2015 10:58:30 +0100 Tim Sammut wrote: > That said, it raises the partially-rhetorical question: should I spend > my $x/month on running a relay or could that money be better used in > other places? Generally depends on if you are getting a good deal on bandwidth, i.e. how many tera

  1   2   3   >