On Sat, Jul 06, 2024 at 06:34:37PM +, Alessandro Greco via tor-relays wrote:
> I have some experience running a Tor relay, and I am now interested in
> setting up another one. I plan to do this using my home internet connection,
> which is an FTTH line with bandwidth up to 2 Gbps.
Thanks
On Sun, Jun 23, 2024 at 09:28:23PM +0200, li...@for-privacy.net wrote:
> A few months ago there was a recommendation to not exposing OrPort for
> bridges.
> This had the unpleasant effect that all bridges were 'red' on Tor Metrics,
> even though they were running perfectly fine.
> I noticed
On Sun, Jun 23, 2024 at 07:30:00PM +, Edward Cage via tor-relays wrote:
> Quick question about the fingerprints of our bridges. It's clearly written
> in torrc that we should not include them in MyFamily.
Correct.
> I don't well understand why, especially because:
> - Every bridge, and
On Tue, Jun 04, 2024 at 04:42:50PM +, Eldalië via tor-relays wrote:
> Hello everyone.
> I have to move somewhere else a a (middle) relay I have been running for a few
> years. It will be down for 2-4 weeks, then be back online in a different
> location, with different ISP, at better speed. But
On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 03:19:49AM +, Mulloch94 via tor-relays wrote:
> Greetings, I was directed to this relay subscription by the owner. I've
> recently started my own relay and everything has went smooth for the first
> few days. Then the relay mysteriously went offline for a period of
On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 03:19:06AM -0400, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> EFF has launched their advocacy campaign for getting more Tor relays
> running at universities:
>
> https://toruniversity.eff.org/
Cooper has posted an update on how the campaign is going:
https://www.eff.org/deepl
On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 06:33:08PM -0500, William Denton wrote:
> Lately my relay hasn't been seeing much traffic, which I didn't notice for a
> while, but now I'm turning my attention to it. I just updated to 0.4.8.9
> and see these notices (with some lines cut out):
Thanks for running a relay!
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 09:40:17AM -0400, John Broome wrote:
> My experience with the Snowflake container is that it will blow through the
> bandwidth limit for the month, and your VPS will cut you off until the next
> billing cycle.
Yes, this is correct, the standalone Snowflake does not have
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 01:18:01PM +, Dan wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I’ve been running my first relay for a few weeks now. The VPS provider I
> chose provides 5TB of bandwidth per month so I have set AccountingMax to “5
> TB” and AccountingStart to
> “day 1 00:00”. It looks as though my relay is
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 07:44:29PM -0400, denny.obre...@a-n-o-n-y-m-e.net wrote:
> I received the following message from Tor Weather. According to Tor Metrics,
> this exit relay still has no Guard flag.
>
> Another - slightly more recent - exit relay
> (25FC41154DCB2CAE3ABD74A8DFCD5B90D2CFFD57)
On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 11:18:46AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Yes, I do!
>
> Please add to the list:
>
> Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
>
> We have been running two relays since 2017/2018, and enabled two additional
> relays (in the same VM / IP address) recently.
Awesome! I will
Hi folks!
EFF has launched their advocacy campaign for getting more Tor relays
running at universities:
https://toruniversity.eff.org/
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/announcing-tor-university-challenge
https://www.eff.org/press/releases/eff-launches-tor-university-challenge
We're
On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 11:28:32PM +0300, s7r wrote:
> While all the above is true, a thing to remember is to make sure we don't
> end up all renting too many VPS'es or dedicated servers in the same places /
> same AS numbers - we need network diversity, it is a very important factor,
> more AS
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 02:09:34AM -0600, David Fifield wrote:
> Thanks, that was a subtlety I had missed. Since we are writing about
> bridges, I mostly want to give the bridge perspective. We had formerly
> written this:
> A relay's current onion keys appear in the Tor network
>
Thanks Nick! I endorse Nick's response, with two additions:
On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 09:07:17AM -0400, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> Onion key rotation limits the time range in which this kind of attack
> is useful: it will only work for as long as the onion key is listed in
> a live directory.
For
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 11:04:25AM -0300, gus wrote:
> The next Tor Relay Operator Meetup will happen on April 15th, 2023, at 19 UTC.
>
> We're still working on the agenda, feel free to add your topics and/or
> questions on the pad:
> https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-relay-op-meetup-april-keep
>
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 12:09:15PM +, Finn wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> We are hosting multiple relays under our AS 210558 and received an email from
> a local police station in Germany requesting user data, nothing unusual.
>
> The weird thing is, that the relay in question is only a relay
On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 01:08:56PM +0100, Sebastian Hahn wrote:
> > On 12. Feb 2023, at 11:46, nusenu wrote:
> > would it be possible to publish
> > the currently enforced value of AuthDirMaxServersPerAddr
> > on some tpo website? Maybe consensus-health.tpo?
>
> that's a bit hard to do
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 12:07:22AM +0100, nusenu wrote:
> I recall a gitlab.tpo issue that discussed the details of whether
> tor clients should change guards when their picked guard lost/gained flags.
> Maybe someone else could paste a link to it.
This might be the one you want:
Hello fellow relay operators,
Later today (Tuesday) we plan to do a synchronized shift where we
make two configuration changes on the directory authorities. The goal
will be to make these changes while maintaining the right threshold of
signatures so relays and users still get a safe network
On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 09:45:32PM +0100, binarynoise wrote:
> Went to settings, checked the bridge settings: yes, I had entered by
> bridge-line. Odd.
>
> Continued to the tor logs: oh, bridge-line didn't parse. Interesting.
> (I put in the server's identity key ed25519 fingerprint instead of
On Sat, Oct 08, 2022 at 02:54:41PM +0200, nusenu wrote:
> dir auths still recommend running tor 0.4.6.x versions today, so relay
> operators never got any indicator
> on RS or in their logs - this is a missed opportunity.
Good catch -- I've just started the process of getting the directory
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 10:58:42PM -0400, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> So: I am giving you all here some early warning, in case you see anything
> odd on the network when we make this change. Let us know if you do. :)
So far so good. Performance looks like it improved.
The "intro2 cel
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 10:58:42PM -0400, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> this change
> means that clients will now choose between two guard relays by default
> (rather than just one) when building circuits.
One of the people on the forum asked if this change applies to bridge
users (
Hi folks,
As part of the hackweek projects
( https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/community/hackweek/ ),
some of us are thinking about simple tweaks we can do to tune the network
to better handle this month's traffic overload.
The long term answer is to try out proposal 327:
On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 07:31:41PM -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 would suggest leaving
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 12:18:41PM +0200, Marco Predicatori wrote:
> the graph shows a marked difference between written bytes per second and
> read bytes per second om 2022-05-19 and 2022-05-20. In any other day the
> bytes are roughly the same. What might my node have "written" on those two
>
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 11:25:00AM -0600, Thoughts wrote:
> Coming up on day 3 of my tor relay, "SpinnerDolphin1". Per the metrics page
> is showing "Dir Address none", but I have a DirPort defined (as nyx
> reports), and opened.
Modern Tor relays don't advertise their DirPort anymore, because
On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 01:40:27PM +0100, Richard Menedetter wrote:
> I installed a non-exit relay 5 days ago.
> Works actually quit nicely.
> I was awarded the stable flag.
> (Also had briefly the HSDir flag, but lost it after a restart. Too early for
> the Guard flag.)
> So I think everything
[I'm about to go off-line for some days, so I am sending my current
suboptimally-organized reply, which I hope is better than waiting another
week to respond :)]
On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 10:42:51PM -0700, David Fifield wrote:
> Let's make a distinction between the "frontend" snowflake-server
>
On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 04:29:10AM +0100, Stefan Leibfarth wrote:
> the annual Tor relay operators meetup will be tomorrow (28th) at 2200 UTC+1.
> No rC3 ticket required
We just finished the meet-up. Thanks Leibi for organizing it, and thanks
everybody for participating. I've attached the notes
On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 12:05:26PM -0700, David Fifield wrote:
> I have the impression that tor cannot use more than one CPU core???is that
> correct? If so, what can be done to permit a bridge to scale beyond
> 1×100% CPU? We can fairly easily scale the Snowflake-specific components
> around the
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 09:26:21PM +0100, yl wrote:
> The standard Debian tor@default.service has "After=network.target
> nss-lookup.target" in it, so one would think network should be fully
> functional when the services starts, but it was not in my case.
> At the time when tor started the eno0
On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 03:42:12PM +, Gary C. New via tor-relays wrote:
> I have a Single Tor Relay comprised of a number of Tor Nodes. I'm always
> interested in knowledge sharing related to Tor Loadbalancing.
> What are your thoughts on the Pros & Cons of dedicating resources to a
>
On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 10:52:42AM +0100, trinity pointard wrote:
> There are multiple bridges distributions mechanism. One is chosen at random
> when your bridge first come to life, each being perfectly fine :
> - moat: distributed automatically to Tor Browser users
> - https: distributed on
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 11:39:50AM +0100, yl wrote:
> Hello all,
> I have a problem with a Tor Exit.
>
> Tor will not start correctly, but there is nothing in the logs. Here is the
> info I got.
Is this the debian package? What OS?
> You can see the start was at 04:28:59 but it only started
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 03:37:24PM +, Tschador wrote:
> in the last few days I noticed a curiosity with the Exitnode
> 4273E6D162ED2717A1CF4207A254004CD3F5307B:
>
> Every time I call 'https://www.startpage.com', the URL in the Browser
> changes to 'http://localhost/'.
>
> Other browser: same
On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 09:04:31PM -0700, Eddie wrote:
> I'm thinking of switching a couple of the VPS servers I have, where I'm
> running both relays and bridges. (On separate VPSs, obviously).
>
> I know how to maintain the keys for both relays and bridges for the
> replacements, but was
On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 01:56:09PM +, torix wrote:
> Okay, then I have another question about MyFamily. Is the only correct format
> MyFamily fingerprint1,fingerprint2,fingerprint3
> or can I put in:
> MyFamily
> #relay 1
> fingerprint1
> #relay 2
> fingerprint2
> #relay 3
> fingerprint3
>
>
On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 09:41:30PM -0500, Kathi wrote:
> I set torrc bandwidth/Burst to 5 MBs/6MBs respectively
How do you set them? By changing your /etc/tor/torrc file? Or some other
way like using nyx?
> Then I get @7pm Local:
>
> Received reload signal (hup). Reloading config and resetting
On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 08:36:20AM -0500, Kathi wrote:
> I'm running three relays. Is it necessary to list all three relays in
> my family on each relay?
Yes, please do list them all.
The first reason is that it helps clients make safe routing decisions:
by signaling to the clients that
On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 01:56:33PM +0200, Tor Relays wrote:
> Support agent 1:
> It was blocked because automatic monitoring system find your activity
> suspicious.
> Now, trust level of your traffic for IP has been increased however the
> traffic is still automatically monitored. If the system of
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 09:35:45PM +0100, Toralf Förster wrote:
> > However, the status page keeps saying I'm dysfunctional with a ECONNREFUSED:
> > https://bridges.torproject.org/status?id=E120A0492F789F5367EAD84C64F92EE279018F98
> >
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 03:10:41PM +, ?? wrote:
> What does it mean "Tor's file descriptor usage is at 90%. If you run
> out Tor will be unable to continue functioning."?
That sounds like a message from nyx:
https://nyx.torproject.org/
It means that your "ulimit -n"
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 07:54:43PM +, William Kane wrote:
> Sorry for being quite noisy recently but I really need to know how
> many people are suffering from the same madness I am encountering
> right now.
>
> Quick excerpt from the log:
>
> Mar 22 09:48:10 tor[pid_redacted]: Mar 22
>
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 09:21:24PM +, Lisa Winter wrote:
> I decided to do some own research, and it seems like the Tor Project
> has a long-standing relationship with Team Cymru (at least since 2012,
> and maybe even earlier):
>
> https://blog.torproject.org/knock-knock-knockin-bridges-doors
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 08:51:06AM -0600, Scott Bennett wrote:
> The following popped up almost an hour and a half ago in my relay's
> log file.
>
> Feb 13 07:27:54.947 [notice] The current consensus has no exit nodes. Tor can
> only build internal paths, such as paths to onion services.
>
On Sun, Feb 07, 2021 at 10:44:53AM -0500, tor wrote:
> When I do the following command:
>
> :~ $ sudo gpg --keyserver keys.gnupg.net --recv
> A3C4F0F979CAA22CDBA8F512EE8CBC9E886DDD89
>
> I get:
>
> gpg: packet(13) too large
> gpg: read_block: read error: Invalid packet
> gpg: no valid OpenPGP
On Sat, Feb 06, 2021 at 12:31:29PM -, relay.jack...@simplelogin.fr wrote:
> im running a tor relay on rpi 2 with version 0.4.2.7., on the Tor relay
> search i see my relay is outdated and flaged as not recomended, however on
> rpi i have tried update and upgrade many times and always get
On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 06:58:55PM -0800, Eddie wrote:
> Following the rebuild, the bridges
> appear to start correctly, according to both the logs and
> https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#search/OhNoAnotherBridge. However
> attempting to connect via the tor browser from my home system just
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 01:20:58AM +0200, s7r wrote:
> Indeed the defense is triggered more often than I expected. Very nice.
Btw, a better version of the #2667 patch is now included in all of the
current Tor releases: 0.3.5.13, 0.4.3.8, 0.4.4.7, 0.4.5.5-rc.
So if you are still trying out my
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 12:17:11PM -0500, tor wrote:
> I'm getting a signature verification error:
>
> $ sudo apt-get update
>
> Hit:1 http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian stretch InRelease
>
> Hit:2 http://archive.raspberrypi.org/debian jessie InRelease
>
> Get:3
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 11:32:44AM +0100, raltul...@posteo.org wrote:
> - At the beginning of January the relay seems to have lost the guard flag
> - A week ago I checked and noticed that the relay had also lost the stable
> flag despite having an uptime of >2 months at that point
> - A week ago I
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 12:34:28AM +0100, nusenu wrote:
> If dir auths (some or all) are willing to share (privately or publicly) the
> distribution of
> attack load (frequency, bandwidth, ...) by exit source IP in total or
> relative values
> I can correlate this data to strengthen a hypothesis
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 07:00:45PM +0100, li...@for-privacy.net wrote:
> Metrics showed my relay offline. But my Tor daemon is running normally.
> Then I saw _many_ relays suddenly have flag: staledesc
> ?
>
> https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#search/flag:staledesc
Yep. The reason that
Hello friendly relay operators,
Another day, another weird thing with the Tor network. This time we
have some jerk bombing the directory authorities with directory fetches,
and doing it via exits:
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/network-health/2021-January/000661.html
The network is
On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 09:29:32AM +0100, Felix wrote:
> When I try
> http://authorityip:dirport/tor/status-vote/current/consensus.z
> it's
> 'failed: Operation timed out'
> What works is:
> http://relayip:dirport/tor/status-vote/current/consensus.z
>
> Am I missing something and is
On Sat, Jan 02, 2021 at 01:31:12PM +0100, Olaf Grimm wrote:
> Exit-IPs: Please block these Exits /Relays
>
> 89.34.27.149, active
> 89.34.27.43 , "supended" in panel, but active. Warning!
> 89.34.27.48, active
> 89.34.27.49, active
> (89.34.27.59 since some days terminated)
> (89.34.27.37
On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 05:47:11AM -0800, tontu wrote:
> I recently acquired a server with "unlimited" (not unmetered) bandwidth
> on a non-Hetzner/OVH/Scaleway network, but the pipe is just 100mbit (and
> will be saturated at some points by personal traffic bursts). That being
> said, I expect
On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 10:54:44PM +0100, Stefan Leibfarth wrote:
> Hello Tor friends and relay operators,
>
> I haven't heard of a relay operators meetup at the ongoing rC3.
> Are there any plans?
> If not, who of you is interested?
It looks like there might not be critical mass for such a
On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 01:50:03PM +0100, RJ Hofmann wrote:
> caused by a temporary failure of the raspberry I had to completely renew
> installation of my TOR relay nicknamed mosaik.
>
> The new installtion is already up and running, but since I had no copies of
> keys and fingerprints the new
On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 04:43:53AM +, torjoy wrote:
> Its just a curiosity question... What is the reference source used in
> comparsions of authorities clock skew in consensus health?
There are two "consensus health" tools, DepicTor and DocTor:
On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 09:53:09PM +0100, Olaf Grimm wrote:
> I have just received two abuse messages from ISP Scaleway Elements for
> two of my middle nodes. Until now I thought this was not possible.
>
> No problem for me. Only here for your information.
I get periodic abuse complaints to my
On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 09:37:38AM +0100, Croax wrote:
> Good. Does this mean it will be check and bumped more regularly?
> I see that lots of relays are running for more than one month from
> now.
I hope so. I plan to keep running my new scripts and see where things
go. Part of it depends on
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 05:56:59AM +, petra...@protonmail.ch wrote:
> Since tonight I can't get any usable Tor connections anymore; restarting Tor
> gives the following error message:
>
> Guard TOR2DFNrelB ($0ED0EA324C931CF41CB5272BFB1D015B3D5772A9) is failing more
> circuits than usual.
On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 09:46:38AM +0100, Toralf Förster wrote:
> On 10/31/20 4:05 AM, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> > I spent some time this week refining a new exit scanner, and today we
> > pushed some new reject rules to kick out some relays that we confirmed
> > were running
Hi folks,
I spent some time this week refining a new exit scanner, and today we
pushed some new reject rules to kick out some relays that we confirmed
were running mitmproxy to do more sslstrips.
For past context, see these urls:
https://blog.torproject.org/bad-exit-relays-may-june-2020
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 04:19:35AM +, BRBfGWMz wrote:
> I recently saw a series of 4 relays connected to each other:
>
> itomori, MediumSlesmn, hotbrownie, pellidos
> itomori, docto, Geheimschreiber, 420isGay
>
> Dont most relays in the network of length 3? Bug in tor?
Your Tor
On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 01:44:31PM +, netaudit wrote:
> I've set up a new Tor exit node around 15 hours ago but despite it had been
> such a time and my exit is visible from outside world I still get little to
> no traffic at all. I also cannot see my servers IP on bulk tor exit node list.
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:49:43AM +0200, nusenu wrote:
> lets see when this graph stops growing
> https://cryptpad.fr/code/#/2/code/view/1uaA141Mzk91n1EL5w0AGM7zucwFGsLWzt-EsXKzNnE/present/
Sounds good. I think, based on your graph, that it is a coincidence that
we launched the
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 03:36:30PM -0400, postmas...@coolcomputers.info wrote:
> I was wondering it anyone more experienced could help me with fixing 1
> TOR Exit and 1 TOR Relay. I have everything configured and fingerprints
> made they just seem to not me recognized by tor metrics.
>
> Tor
On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 01:39:17PM -0500, Mike Perry wrote:
> > I believe I can tell rerouting exits from exits having distinct IPs for
> > inbound and outbound connections - in most cases.
>
> Are your scanners available for others to run? I understand that it is a
> risk that making them public
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 12:57:46PM +0200, Felix wrote:
> Libressl 321 is not compatible to what is needed to make the authorities
> tor26, dizum, gabel., maatu. and longc. happy (let them not grant a
> "Running"). What can that be?
>
> Please somebody can _confirm_ this thing?
You're not crazy.
On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 12:00:37PM +0100, Dr Gerard Bulger wrote:
> To be fair, the automated system takes it off after an our or two. If my
> tor server is left in this mitigated state, the tor exit gets labelled a BAD
> EXIT which is something to avoid as takes days to be trusted again.
Can
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 06:49:01PM +, John Ricketts wrote:
> I as well.
>
> On Aug 25, 2020, at 13:45, niftybunny
> wrote:
>
> ?Daily DDOS love the last 14 days ...
Hi! Can you provide more details? From Nifty's picture it looks like
they are full TCP connections? Do you have a sense of
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 03:34:55PM +0200, niftybunny wrote:
> This shit has to stop. Why are the relays in question still online?
Hm? The relays are not online -- we kicked them in mid June.
We don't know of any relays right now that are attacking users.
Or said another way, if anybody knows of
On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 09:12:31PM +, 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). What should I do ?
>
> I suspect that my VPS will be copied and
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 01:01:12AM +0200, nusenu wrote:
> > https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/metrics/relay-search/-/issues/40001
>
> thanks, I'll reply here since I (and probably others) can not reply there.
Fwiw, anybody who wants a gitlab account should just ask for one. Don't
be shy. :)
The
On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 06:35:32PM +0200, nusenu wrote:
> To prevent this from happening over and over again
> I'm proposing two simple but to some extend effective relay requirements
> to make malicious relay operations more expensive, time consuming,
> less sustainable and more risky for such
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 07:10:43AM -0300, Vitor Milagres wrote:
> I see the Authority Nodes are located only in North America and Europe.
> I would like to contribute to the TOR network as much as possible. I am
> currently running a node and I would like to make it an Authority Node as
> well.
>
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 10:21:34AM +0200, Salvatore Cuzzilla wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I'm running a non-exit relay (v0.4.2.7) on OpenBSD 6.7.
> The amount of files within "/var/tor/diff-cache" is steadily increasing.
> Up to almost 6G fulfilling the /var partition to the max.
>
> Is this an
On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 07:27:55PM +0200, Paul Geurts wrote:
> anything up this weekend?
>
> [image: image.png]
Yes. There is a mysterious alternative Tor client out there, which is
programmed to do uncompressed directory fetches just from the directory
authorities. It easily overloads directory
On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 05:38:09AM +, petra...@protonmail.ch wrote:
> Hello all,
> my relay is set up to support 42 Mbps, however does not get any real traffic
> routed through it (605EE4375EE4C38215C8949F5808863749FD4F4A). I checked
> anything I could think of but everything looks fine to
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 04:12:07PM +, nottryingtobel...@protonmail.com
wrote:
> Tried to run sudo apt install tor-geoipdb and got this:
>
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> tor-geoipdb : Depends: tor (>= 0.4.3.5-1~d10.buster+1) but
> 0.4.2.7-1~d10.buster+1 is to be
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 08:03:03PM +0200, tscha...@posteo.de wrote:
> after an update of tor it always take about 4 days to get the HSDir flag
> back while the other flags are set very qick. What is the reason for
> this delay?
It's because the directory authorities are configured to wait that
On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 01:15:46PM -0700, Eddie wrote:
> > Bridge obfs4 : cert= iat-mode=0
> > I have all the parts mentioned in the text except for .
> >
> It's the port from this line: ServerTransportListenAddr obfs4
> 0.0.0.0: where the odfs4 is listening.
Right. Or if you didn't set a
On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 09:28:09PM +, nottryingtobel...@protonmail.com
wrote:
> I brought up a new bridge and thought everything was fine according to the
> logs (OR port accessible, check, server descriptor published, check, etc.). I
> didn't see any activity on it after awhile, so I tried
On Sun, May 03, 2020 at 10:15:47PM +0200, li...@for-privacy.net wrote:
> Below is the information about the attack. Keep in mind that the source IP
> of our client has been sanitized for anonymity.
>
> Date: 04/30/2020
> Time: 11:05:37
> Time Zone: America/Chicago
> Source(s): 37.157.255.118
>
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 11:14:11PM +0200, yl wrote:
> I am too tired now to look into it, but I would love to get some
> requests for information to supply and will look to supply all info
> needed. The server is still in the error state.
Did you ever tell us a fingerprint (and/or nickname) for
On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 10:16:34AM +0200, Clément Février wrote:
> The issue is back. After more than 3 days, the relay appears offline.
> All flags are gone in nyx. There is a bug.
I believe there is something wrong with your ipv6 port.
I see that your relay is advertising
[Hi Mario! I wrote this draft and then stopped half-through, and then
teor wrote a good response too. So I'm going to send it as-is, rather
than quietly delete it, in case it helps reinforce some of the points
that teor made.]
On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 02:55:59PM +0200, Mario Costa wrote:
> I???m
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 01:41:41PM +, torjoy wrote:
> I was browsing the "Consensus health" page and something let me curious...
> What is the importance of the clock skew in the authorities with the
> resolution of microseconds?
Sebastian's answer is exactly right.
I've just opened
On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 02:02:29PM +, Anonforpeace wrote:
> Hope someone can help. I had a power outage the other night and when I
> turned on my bridge the next day, I found that I have no connectivity. It is
> hard wired and among all other computers, it is the only one that is offline.
On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 09:40:39AM +0200, ylms wrote:
> So I see some info there, but nothing helpful since I just activated
> logging yesterday. I will revisit this in a few days when/if the problem
> occurs again, also I increased the rotation for the log to 14 days and
> am now logging into
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 06:21:00AM -0400, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> FYI, below is a start at a short-term plan to address the current network
> weighting issues, now that, as of a few weeks ago, gabelmoo's torflow
> died and Sebastian hasn't been able to get it going properly again
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 01:53:42PM +0200, Clément Février wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On April 5th, the consensus weight of my tor relay dropped to 0, see
> https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/33D88F331408141F2A2CC563239E54E48F7A211B
> As far as I know, nothing specific happened, no update nor
- Forwarded message from Roger Dingledine -
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 06:06:26 -0400
From: Roger Dingledine
To: dir-auth
Subject: Network is suffering with only two torflows; can you help?
tl;dr there's a way at the bottom of this mail that you can help even
without running torflow yourself.
[...]
So
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 11:01:09AM +0200, Totor be wrote:
> I have upgraded recently my relays (totorbe*) to CentOS8 + tor 0.4.2.7 and
> they all seemed to run properly
> This morning, I just noticed a weird behavior on one of them (no idea since
> when this is going on)
>
> When starting tor, it
On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 07:55:39PM -0700, Andy Isaacson wrote:
> 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
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 05:35:28PM +0100, li...@for-privacy.net wrote:
> > Whereas if you add your own user to the debian-tor group, and then run
> > nyx
> > as yourself, you are better isolated from pieces of Tor that nyx has no
> > business being able to access.
>
> Is there anything wrong with
1 - 100 of 454 matches
Mail list logo
