Re: [tor-relays] interesting tor platform string or tor bug?

2016-07-07 Thread Ivan Markin
Tim Wilson-Brown - teor: > Hmm, I can't find an actual descriptor with these characters in it. The > latest descriptor I can find for this relay has a normal platform line: > https://collector.torproject.org/recent/relay-descriptors/server-descriptors/2016-07-06-06-05-14-server-descriptors > >

Re: [tor-relays] interesting tor platform string or tor bug?

2016-07-07 Thread Roger Dingledine
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 10:07:56AM +1000, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote: > Hmm, I can't find an actual descriptor with these characters in it. The > latest descriptor I can find for this relay has a normal platform line: >

Re: [tor-relays] interesting tor platform string or tor bug?

2016-07-07 Thread Tim Wilson-Brown - teor
> On 8 Jul 2016, at 09:48, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote: > > >> On 8 Jul 2016, at 09:41, nusenu wrote: >> >> Hi Seongmin, >> >> out of curiosity I was wondering whether your so called tor "platform" >> string ("??B`?\u0001") or your tor relay [1]

Re: [tor-relays] interesting tor platform string or tor bug?

2016-07-07 Thread Tim Wilson-Brown - teor
> On 8 Jul 2016, at 09:41, nusenu wrote: > > Hi Seongmin, > > out of curiosity I was wondering whether your so called tor "platform" > string ("??B`?\u0001") or your tor relay [1] was generated by a modified > tor installation on Windows 8 or if we are looking at some

[tor-relays] interesting tor platform string or tor bug?

2016-07-07 Thread nusenu
Hi Seongmin, out of curiosity I was wondering whether your so called tor "platform" string ("??B`?\u0001") or your tor relay [1] was generated by a modified tor installation on Windows 8 or if we are looking at some bug in vanilla tor? thanks! [1]

[tor-relays] AS: "SIGTERM MIKAL VILLA" - Linux (15)

2016-07-07 Thread nusenu
Dear sigterm support, thanks for adding relays. In case you are aiming for the exit flag, you will have to add port 80 or 443 to your current exit policy (accept *:6660-6667) because 2 out of 3 ports are required to gain the exit flag, see:

Re: [tor-relays] suspicious "Relay127001" relays

2016-07-07 Thread Ivan Markin
simon: > As I see it, removing via directory authority consensus is still the > cleaner way, especially in a case of ~100 similar nodes. > > What came to my mind was something like a bugtracker for bad nodes. Yes, but it's too crafty and should be done by hand. Doing so is error

Re: [tor-relays] VPS for Exits and non-Exits

2016-07-07 Thread Jean-Philippe Décarie-Mathieu
In my case, the decision to host my Tor VPS on OVH's infrastructure is to support a business that is based in Québec. Ideology aside, I agree that network diversity is key (along with the multiplication of exit nodes). Regards, *Jean-Philippe Décarie-Mathieu* j...@jpdm.org

Re: [tor-relays] suspicious "Relay127001" relays

2016-07-07 Thread simon
On 06.07.2016 15:50, Ivan Markin wrote: > The introduction of peering policy definitely solves this issue in a > transparent and harmless way. Filed a ticket #19625 [1] to move this > discussion > there. On 06.07.2016 14:56, Roger Dingledine wrote: > Speaking of which, a while ago I started a

Re: [tor-relays] Darknet Shenanigans [was: suspicious "Relay127001" relays]

2016-07-07 Thread Yawning Angel
On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 07:29:04 +0200 Andreas Krey wrote: > On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 15:06:00 +, grarpamp wrote: > ... > > https://boingboing.net/2016/07/01/researchers-find-over-100-spyi.html > > Is there a way to make tor log connection attempts to any ports > on an hidden service