[tor-relays] Unmeasured Flag
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 So if I'm understanding this correctly, we're still having problems with a bw testing nodes and that is why my relay has the unmetered flag? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: Keybase OpenPGP v2.0.76 Comment: https://keybase.io/crypto wsBcBAABCgAGBQJalsdlAAoJEHIAmlM/NGGbpQcH/16WQLlMAAVzx4blIRV2bIJF Hwdyj4FFQ+Ms0hHhj1DwMkB6EMa11kogLA8k+NGim8QeF2Qyobd1lARUXjZdfbV5 s/L6JYYCO+PsJxJY2+nOU41HUps1w5zLfFy+ekxkVwsX8dXq+SVy06+1HXfjY2uT HJnIpkx9/IZWMjJzRv33ylIMDq4u0MltJr+4MRrb5rSn6+9pz9m4z6CeUKJbsiLh nE0YRblkRwfrlVCP3VTaaRyQdMUwWzKwnB9S8dtKGDKb+tYz4QduFuzBf1eGGrO7 cp9GeHiittyBSGylRWveQgbkzwXRGPuUGtabXutQRqGXDvanDtEroHg+hUP0SEw= =b7/2 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Unmeasured Flag
Ive noticed this with my nodes too and a lot of nodes that have been online for days, seems like the consensus is just being slow. ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On 28 February 2018 3:15 PM, Matthew Glennon wrote: > So if I'm understanding this correctly, we're still having problems with a bw > testing nodes and that is why my relay has the unmetered flag? ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Unmeasured Flag
On 2/28/18 10:15, Matthew Glennon wrote: > So if I'm understanding this correctly, we're still having problems with > a bw testing nodes and that is why my relay has the unmetered flag? Right. The bandwidth measuring system is still spinning back up. No one is considered measured. Things will be back to normal "soon." Matt ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Unmeasured Flag
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Thanks. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: Keybase OpenPGP v2.0.76 Comment: https://keybase.io/crypto wsBcBAABCgAGBQJals2hAAoJEHIAmlM/NGGbGPkIAJVLlIaW8V9mMhQghPCHSi0o sEY84vDSYkOXKxUHaCbAXieSgq3IEJsD801DybACUhN2r0RhTpxIqzPSuL8F3VGC KdTT22zqAyB6r9WSVosaKzTts0tGIaON/TOJpm3WUoZdNJ31tBqHiP8Re09wnR5b 3V3D4D1/ZP4AhVYKFJ0+UReGuHa71ZUsUd6hhajsdccLkeRmAHhspJmn9G2DN/UA 1fvP5lu2uLXr1voHrakZMH6WvUwO2nES94SxflgEKqkq32ejLTeu6Q+fLFuv9LA1 Ju5TurdIXnDaIFs1+40sLiZUYKYpGSXimJsLe+G8tyfrKyYltPu/S3vpR/xFjI0= =Le8E -END PGP SIGNATURE- On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 10:21 AM Matt Traudt wrote: > On 2/28/18 10:15, Matthew Glennon wrote: > > So if I'm understanding this correctly, we're still having problems with > > a bw testing nodes and that is why my relay has the unmetered flag? > > Right. The bandwidth measuring system is still spinning back up. No one > is considered measured. > > Things will be back to normal "soon." > > Matt > ___ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > -- Matthew Glennon matthew@glennon.online PGP Signing Available Upon Request https://keybase.io/crazysane ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] FreeBSD 11.1 ZFS Tor Image
On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 14:47:06 -0500 grarpamp allegedly wrote: > If ovh vps gives root, bypass the fee with: md(4) vnode > geli > > mount. > > Then again, if the iron isn't dipped in epoxy (not done), in your own > secure datacenter (not extant), on trusted #OpenHW (not AMD / Intel / > or any other to date), built in trusted #OpenFabs (non extant), > running validated #OpenSW (non extant), in a voluntarist libertarian > environment free from force, one's use case might be moot. > Gotta love you Grarpamp. :-) But in the real world we /have/ to trust someone, somewhere, somehow, sometime. What everyone has to decide for themselves is /how much/ trust to give, to whom, when, where and why. And that depends entirely on your threat model and your appetite for risk. Mick - Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 http://baldric.net/about-trivia - ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] FreeBSD 11.1 ZFS Tor Image
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 6:38 PM mick wrote: > But in the real world we /have/ to trust someone, somewhere, somehow, > sometime. What everyone has to decide for themselves is /how much/ trust > to give, to whom, when, where and why. And that depends entirely on your > threat model and your appetite for risk. > > Mick > well sed -- 0101100101010100110101010101010010100110 01001100010001010101001101010011001001011001010001010101 ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] FreeBSD 11.1 ZFS Tor Image
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 10:43 AM, mick wrote: > On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 14:47:06 -0500 > grarpamp allegedly wrote: > >> If ovh vps gives root, bypass the fee with: md(4) vnode > geli > >> mount. >> >> Then again, if the iron isn't dipped in epoxy (not done), in your own >> secure datacenter (not extant), on trusted #OpenHW (not AMD / Intel / >> or any other to date), built in trusted #OpenFabs (non extant), >> running validated #OpenSW (non extant), in a voluntarist libertarian >> environment free from force, one's use case might be moot. >> > > Gotta love you Grarpamp. :-) > > But in the real world we /have/ to trust someone, somewhere, somehow, > sometime. What everyone has to decide for themselves is /how much/ trust > to give, to whom, when, where and why. And that depends entirely on your > threat model and your appetite for risk. Sorry, but with decades of both plausible and exploited risk extant, with however many million millionaires and significant billionaires, and crowdfunding (further enhanced by the dawn of cryptocurrency and all its new models that can be brought to bear)... there is no rational reason to continue this global head in sand downplay and refusal to get moving and start building #OpenHW in #OpenFabs. The old goalpost of who, where, how, when, and how much open and even explicitly proven trust exists in HW / Fabs simply must start shifting for the better until it becomes the new "real world". Further, such trust is profitable business model. If kids can build home semiconductor labs making open IC's, you can bet the above sponsors with those visionaries can easily scale beyond a billion gates. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=home+semiconductor+fab (Obligatory credit given to #OpenSW for at least being opensource, but they're hardly under open validation programs yet either.) ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] FreeBSD 11.1 ZFS Tor Image
Vinícius Zavam: > 2018-02-25 21:23 GMT+00:00 Conrad Rockenhaus : >> >> On Sunday, February 25, 2018 3:05:00 PM CST George wrote: >>> Conrad Rockenhaus: Hello All, If anyone is interested, I have a RAW image of a FreeBSD 11.1 ZFS > image that is fully configured and ready to run Tor. Right now it's an > eight GB image, but I'm reducing the size by removing all of the extra stuff > on it from the upgrade from FreeBSD 11 to 11.1. >>> >>> I think it's great to ease the implementation of Tor relays, >>> particularly on BSDs. >> >> My main thought process behind trying to ease the implementation of BSD > relays >> is the fact that we should diversify what we have online within the > network. >> Most of our nodes are Linux. What if we have another vulnerability that > comes >> out that hits Linux specifically again? >> >>> >>> However, I'd be wary of an image that I didn't build myself, personally. >>> >> That's your opinion. The AWS relay project was very successful. Numerous >> people ran an image that they didn't build. Numerous people also run > Docker >> containers that they didn't build. Numerous people run Vagrant boxes they >> didn't build. You have the right to be weary, but there's numerous people > out >> there who run other people's images everyday. >> If you're interested in the image let me know. This image has been > fully tested on OVH's Openstack infrastructure, so if you're interested in running it on their infrastructure, let me know and I can walk you through it, or you're more than welcome to host is within my cloud at cost (it's a low monthly rate and unlimited bandwidth). >>> >>> Another issue is that OVH is over relied upon for public nodes. It's the >>> leading ASN with almost 15%. >> >> They're one of the few providers out there that allow exits. That's why > 15% of >> our exits are on OVH. >> >>> >>> https://torbsd.org/oostats/relays-bw-by-asn.txt >>> >>> OTOH, I do think we (in particular BSD people) need to facilitate the >>> implementation of BSD relays, including for VPS services for those >>> looking to test the waters. >> >> I completely agree. > > I wonder if people hosting Tor relays in any sort of VPS are doing > filesystem encryption. > >>> >>> The TDP wiki has a list of other BSD-offering VPSs, plus a script for >>> Vultur to build on OpenBSD. I tend to think using other people's scripts >>> that can be reviewed and hacked is a better gateway for new relay >>> operators than images. > > you can combine the FreeBSD jails feature with your idea. > plus, do not share many Tor instances on the same machine/server/jail. > Actually, that raises a side point... FreeBSD jails are usually viewed as a tool to create full system with the glorious addition of root. But they can also be used to build minimal chroot-looking systems, in that they can be deliciously small, yet incredibly secure, especially compared to chroot. FreeBSD jails started as a simple http hosting solution a long while back, very much a "unorthodox solution to a traditional problem." But they have a utility that gets confused when they are considered just-another-virtualization alternative to delude users into thinking they have full system control. g -- 34A6 0A1F F8EF B465 866F F0C5 5D92 1FD1 ECF6 1682 ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] FreeBSD 11.1 ZFS Tor Image
On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 6:46:00 PM CST George wrote: > Vinícius Zavam: > > 2018-02-25 21:23 GMT+00:00 Conrad Rockenhaus : > >> On Sunday, February 25, 2018 3:05:00 PM CST George wrote: > >>> Conrad Rockenhaus: > Hello All, > > If anyone is interested, I have a RAW image of a FreeBSD 11.1 ZFS > > > > image > > > that is fully configured and ready to run Tor. Right now it's an > > > > eight GB > > > image, but I'm reducing the size by removing all of the extra stuff > > > > on it > > > from the upgrade from FreeBSD 11 to 11.1. > >>> > >>> I think it's great to ease the implementation of Tor relays, > >>> particularly on BSDs. > >> > >> My main thought process behind trying to ease the implementation of BSD > > > > relays > > > >> is the fact that we should diversify what we have online within the > > > > network. > > > >> Most of our nodes are Linux. What if we have another vulnerability that > > > > comes > > > >> out that hits Linux specifically again? > >> > >>> However, I'd be wary of an image that I didn't build myself, personally. > >> > >> That's your opinion. The AWS relay project was very successful. Numerous > >> people ran an image that they didn't build. Numerous people also run > > > > Docker > > > >> containers that they didn't build. Numerous people run Vagrant boxes they > >> didn't build. You have the right to be weary, but there's numerous people > > > > out > > > >> there who run other people's images everyday. > >> > If you're interested in the image let me know. This image has been > > > > fully > > > tested on OVH's Openstack infrastructure, so if you're interested in > running it on their infrastructure, let me know and I can walk you > through it, or you're more than welcome to host is within my cloud at > cost (it's a low monthly rate and unlimited bandwidth). > >>> > >>> Another issue is that OVH is over relied upon for public nodes. It's the > >>> leading ASN with almost 15%. > >> > >> They're one of the few providers out there that allow exits. That's why > > > > 15% of > > > >> our exits are on OVH. > >> > >>> https://torbsd.org/oostats/relays-bw-by-asn.txt > >>> > >>> OTOH, I do think we (in particular BSD people) need to facilitate the > >>> implementation of BSD relays, including for VPS services for those > >>> looking to test the waters. > >> > >> I completely agree. > > > > I wonder if people hosting Tor relays in any sort of VPS are doing > > filesystem encryption. > > > >>> The TDP wiki has a list of other BSD-offering VPSs, plus a script for > >>> Vultur to build on OpenBSD. I tend to think using other people's scripts > >>> that can be reviewed and hacked is a better gateway for new relay > >>> operators than images. > > > > you can combine the FreeBSD jails feature with your idea. > > plus, do not share many Tor instances on the same machine/server/jail. > > Actually, that raises a side point... > > FreeBSD jails are usually viewed as a tool to create full system with > the glorious addition of root. > > But they can also be used to build minimal chroot-looking systems, in > that they can be deliciously small, yet incredibly secure, especially > compared to chroot. > > FreeBSD jails started as a simple http hosting solution a long while > back, very much a "unorthodox solution to a traditional problem." But > they have a utility that gets confused when they are considered > just-another-virtualization alternative to delude users into thinking > they have full system control. > > > > g We could always make it more fun and throw FreeBSD/Docker on top of the mess: https://wiki.freebsd.org/Docker I was looking at Jails before, but I ruled it out because I'm looking at this project from the level of I'm running a VM on a OpenStack/VMware, or AWS infrastructure as a small VM dedicated to just Tor. So the who VM is dedicated to just Tor. So, basically instead of virtualizing an environment already running in a virtual machine dedicated to the task of running that run task, I figured just keep things on the VM. Of course, I may be looking at that wrong, but I think that would be the best option to weigh all of the factors that go into the project. Conrad signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
