tor-relays July 2014

tor-relays@lists.torproject.org

83 participants
58 discussions

Trying Trusted Tor Traceroutes
by Sebastian Urbach 06 Jul '14

06 Jul '14

Dear list members, Just a quick update regarding the TTTT project. There are multiple GB's of data to analyse and it is still being worked on. We are also working on the public script(s) as well. Thanks for your ongoing support ! -- Mit freundlichen Grüssen / Sincerely yours Sebastian Urbach ---------------------------------------------- Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. ---------------------------------------------- Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Inventor, journalist, printer, diplomat and statesman

2 1

Relays or exits: which is needed?
by michaelball＠riseup.net 06 Jul '14

06 Jul '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 I'm (hopefully) going to be running a few high-speed Tor servers sometime in the near future. Which type of Tor server (exits vs. relays) is needed the most right now? Thanks. Michael Ball @cryptostone - 0x0BEF5055 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJTuMmTAAoJEPz+HqEL71BVSK4P/3QLZN0dXoMFgz4//pKzCEsl A0GW/DZEgmVwjo0GVmuvKnxcY+e8w53NQ7nD4XtIJw+KC/VgYnYomjA+JxI8UMWF HkQ3KHuX90YbUTPFD2aJmcj6ZUs99pHjgZblEzPzMxfPWgHXDe09bT7Z1TBGsJg0 JW1aQuo64tF1YPqhh98P7Qqn9mRU7MiWhzJjRUCPsj5CeQO1x/QcXBYP77UGtPe3 y6bpwberzbM6GgDjwdIb61LJScE/5bueApOEmvO6PJ3lMwwnJhrynExmE/nhR/lC bZ7YCwD4ICCuHIv9b0DqBMZDHb5mZuRtqDiUKzFwXX/M3Mj88RtBQemNZXTbvBp4 3cXejN5cPUAOgE2RC93bk40n7oYGkDtQDHu7i7Ed8K3r8yCGDbUt0KZzbHU3/EDQ v2AlFY/UqDR7XTjYMQAPcwG+iHbaHVClMRn9V512sBqMtjliV2ODbqEZYhpUfvTF jMUgNE9vFVmlmIGmxZAbeoktxM+8o3M/coyV5xz9GbkL6ChYFHX5h215LstXqtBk M3dW8GMV48Qsa1zSDGp1aMXTpXZ1gm6h/+SfokEhKYSqcJFbqQIYvjL+V5+DLlZ/ 9Njcg+bAirvQfLIEtSsNQNenmJG5juB/eUs6LZjCbuL2YGbRuVtPMSmmxORQMnXl f/CTUUssfdxwt05GG4cz =kLYH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

Re: [tor-relays] New Tor node operator hibernation question
by pandemicrelay＠hushmail.com 05 Jul '14

05 Jul '14

Thank you for explaining hibernation better. Could there be any issue though since I 'forced' my relay out of this hibernation?

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] gazduire.ro
by icetor.is＠bitmessage.ro 05 Jul '14

05 Jul '14

On 7/5/2014 6:14 AM, Moritz Bartl wrote:> Potentially interesting candidate for Tor exits. Someone on IRC said > they accepted exits. I didn't look at it in detail, it would be > interesting to know if they're just using Voxility or a different data > center/peering. > > https://www.gazduire.ro/ > https://www.voxility.com/ > > One of our bridge servers is located at m247, which are very friendly, > but I don't know if they allow exits, and they're a subsidiary of a UK > company: > > https://www.m247.ro/ > Hi, They do allow exits. 6C36F9ACBA57AC9C10DBC39D330CFA337522E72B The one and only in their network. They are nice and cooperative, never had a problem in > 3 months of continious usage. Only requiremenet is to block port TCP 25 outgoing (SMTP) to prevent email spam. No anti p2p filesharing policy. I don't think they are the same datacenter with Voxility. This is NETBRIDGE group, a group of comapnies running multiple very high profile websites here (like advertising websites and traffic measurement websites for .ro TLD). Their headoffice is in Bucharest, but the datacenter I think it's not in Bucharest, it is in other city (Suceava) some few hundreds KMs distance. Pros: - very srong uptime - good datacenter respecting highest industry's standards - nice ccoopeartion - vmware esxi virtualization - good network speed and quality - unmetered traffic Cons: - non-english version of their website (can be easily fixed); - only accepting visa/mastercard/paypal payments (maybe they can be convinced to go for BTC or WMZ if they are properly educated abut it); I have a good relation with them, Moritz, if you need specific details let me know and I'll update you here. ---Robert

1 0

gazduire.ro
by Moritz Bartl 05 Jul '14

05 Jul '14

Potentially interesting candidate for Tor exits. Someone on IRC said they accepted exits. I didn't look at it in detail, it would be interesting to know if they're just using Voxility or a different data center/peering. https://www.gazduire.ro/ https://www.voxility.com/ One of our bridge servers is located at m247, which are very friendly, but I don't know if they allow exits, and they're a subsidiary of a UK company: https://www.m247.ro/ -- Moritz Bartl https://www.torservers.net/

2 1

Why did my relay fall out of the consensus?
by Steve Snyder 04 Jul '14

04 Jul '14

On June 9th my relay, which was established about 20 months ago, fell out of the cached consensus. There are no errors in the logs, just notices that the relay is not in the cached consensus. Apart from upgrading to Tor v0.2.4.22 3 days earlier I haven't made any changes to the server. Anyone know what's going on here? https://exonerator.torproject.org/?targetaddr=&targetPort=&ip=5.9.191.52&ti… Thanks.

4 7

TAO on tor ops
by obx＠riseup.net 04 Jul '14

04 Jul '14

Do we have to assume to get targeted by TAO? Should we dump hardware ordered online?

2 1

NSA special treatment for Tor community
by no.thing_to-hide＠cryptopathie.eu 04 Jul '14

04 Jul '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello Tor relays! If you did not subscribe to the talk-list, like me until this evening, you may have missed the latest surveillance news: The NSA targets directly the nine Tor directory servers https://daserste.ndr.de/panorama/aktuell/nsa230_page-1.html The whole article is highly recommended to read. In what way normal, internal relays like mine are affected, is not further investigated. Best regards, and: Stay wiretapped! Anton - -- no.thing_to-hide at cryptopathie dot eu 0x30C3CDF0, RSA 2048, 24 Mar 2014 0FF8 A811 8857 1B7E 195B 649E CC26 E1A5 30C3 CDF0 Bitmessage (no metadata): BM-2cXixKZaqzJmTfz6ojiyLzmKg2JbzDnApC -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTtdjNAAoJEMwm4aUww83wl1gH/0k7HpY1k+ZQVrwowyZfVRK+ EnIJLarO8sOTKIz9wFpu3ZTo8x8zDBlca05au6Wa/RuxHzf8W5yl+xgulBKKhQkR l+lqQvv0Me2DcwFTfUsBoYkNxaoaf0sF1yO2Bn1OF3iMQO+nyF5bMV6WLq722AoR jFsvvvVP6JIRd14HFVLKMrpOvqEPkJa0XTpvQGBUpKxJA/+/hj+Od+/RpwC2eyIM lAjrDxvDGFwIzCFn/vgBGMSvOUmm+LVnMR/uVmNCRAylmF25YtkP3t4tM7iPKMNg 1aQWCCnT6UusdkSzjs3AazcIA9797029wDTZ4B9dUljhB4i3DrcdgiX3txjqQQw= =zCCT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: [tor-relays] New Tor node operator hibernation question
by Simon Hanna 03 Jul '14

03 Jul '14

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 7:34 AM, <pandemicrelay(a)hushmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I am a new Tor relay operator, and have setup my first relay. It's been > running as a Tor middle relay for about 10 days now, and it's been running > solid. It has the stable, guard, fast, running, and valid flags. I have my > AccountingMax quota set to start at the first of each month at midnight. > However, just past midnight on 07-01 Tor said it was going to hibernate > until 07-05. This had me confused as I was only about half way through my > monthly quota setup in AccountingMax for June, and my hosting provider > reset the data on the first at midnight. I read the manual page about > AccountingMax again, and it appears this may have been normal behavior. > However before I read the manual page, I forced my relay to wake up out of > that hibernation. It appears to be operating normally right now. However, I > am wondering if this will cause any issues this month, or in future months? > Also, can someone explain if the hibernation of 5 days was normal behavior > to begin with. > > Thank you > As far as I know, tor startes at some random point so that not all nodes are up in the beginning of the month. If every node would do that, at the end of the month (or day if all have accounting per day) nobody would be able to use tor...

1 0

Obfs + Non-obfs bridges
by Daniel Thill 03 Jul '14

03 Jul '14

Can a single tor daemon instance provide both non-obfuscated and various other obfuscated transports? Right now, I have one instance that provides both obfs3 and scramblesuit. E.g., ServerTransportPlugin obfs3,scramblesuit exec /usr/local/bin/obfsproxy managed ServerTransportListenAddr obfs3 MYIP:PORT ServerTransportListenAddr scramblesuit MYIP:PORT2 I currently have another tor instance that runs a vanilla bridge configuration (no transports) on a different port. Is this really necessary? I couldn't find any documentation that address this. Can non-transport clients use any bridge by simply not negotiating a transport? There is a "none" pluggable transport type, but I figured that was for debugging purposes. Thanks, Dan

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

tor-relays July 2014