Re: [tor-relays] bug messages in my relay's notices.log

teor wrote: > > > On 22 Sep 2017, at 21:24, Scott Bennett wrote: > > > > nusenu wrote: > > > >> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/23551 > >> > > Thanks for the pointer. I'm glad it has been reported, but I still

Re: [tor-relays] Individual Operator Exit Probability Threshold

Hey John! In Seattle, as you know, Emerald Onion is now online. We're at about 1.5% right now. We're grant writing, too, and hopefully within the next year we will be able to support 5-10%. Have you published any Warrant Canaries? We're working with Calyx on a generic template for relay

[tor-relays] Bug Report for 3.1.7 (Debian)

Good Morning, I just updated my Exit to 3.1.7 (Debian) a few hours ago and found this: [warn] tor_bug_occurred_(): Bug: ../src/common/compress.c 576: Sep 22 15:01:46.000 [warn] Bug: Non-fatal assertion !((rv == TOR_COMPRESS_OK) && *iSep 22 15:01:46.000 [warn] Bug:

[tor-relays] tor on tails

Hi, can i setup a tor server with tails ? I planing 4 new tor servers TorGate1,2,3,4 . Is this a god ide ? Steffen ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] abuse email for non-exit relay (masergy)

> On 23 Sep 2017, at 01:49, Iain R. Learmonth wrote: > > Hi teor, > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 11:14:07PM +1000, teor wrote: >> >>> On 22 Sep 2017, at 23:03, relay 000 wrote: >>> Someone is using the hidden service rendezvous protocol to ask

Re: [tor-relays] Individual Operator Exit Probability Threshold

To the initial question for a honest operator who's open about their ownership and enters proper family membership data I can't see how more exit volume is a problem. TOR needs to be resilient against malicious operators who don't disclose, nto sure what the current value of "global" is but I

Re: [tor-relays] Individual Operator Exit Probability Threshold

I respond to them by the method required of the subpoena. Generally they are delivered by E-Mail so I respond to them in kind, explain that I am running a legal Tor Exit Node, explain what Tor is, and point to exonerator.torproject.org showing that that IP

Re: [tor-relays] Individual Operator Exit Probability Threshold

> I get about sixty (60) abuse notifications a day and on average eight (8) > subpoenas a month. How do you handle the subpoenas?___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org

Re: [tor-relays] Individual Operator Exit Probability Threshold

Dylan, I totally agree. In this case I am the ISP (AS 62744) and I will be sure to write myself AUP violation notices early and often. :-) *humor* In a not so humorous note, I get about sixty (60) abuse notifications a day and on average eight (8) subpoenas a month. John On Sep 22, 2017,

Re: [tor-relays] Individual Operator Exit Probability Threshold

Definitely be careful, though, especially if they’re from the same hosting provider account. It will increase the chance of receiving an abuse report: and if someone is using Tor to attack and your exits are all picked then that chance just unfortunately increased. It would be a shame to get

Re: [tor-relays] abuse email for non-exit relay (masergy)

Hi, On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 04:52:02PM +0100, Pascal Terjan wrote: > There may be some timing difference, a faster response if the > connection fails/is rejected vs if nothing is listening Ah, I hadn't thought of that. Although I guess this would also be the case if there is congestion or a

Re: [tor-relays] abuse email for non-exit relay (masergy)

On 22 September 2017 at 16:49, Iain R. Learmonth wrote: > Hi teor, > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 11:14:07PM +1000, teor wrote: >> >> > On 22 Sep 2017, at 23:03, relay 000 wrote: >> > >> >> Someone is using the hidden service rendezvous protocol to ask

Re: [tor-relays] abuse email for non-exit relay (masergy)

Hi teor, On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 11:14:07PM +1000, teor wrote: > > > On 22 Sep 2017, at 23:03, relay 000 wrote: > > > >> Someone is using the hidden service rendezvous protocol to ask non-exit > >> relays to scan non-tor IP addresses. > > > > wow, people can misuse my

Re: [tor-relays] FallbackDirectoryMirrors selection criteria "uptime"

Am 22.09.2017 16:07 schrieb nusenu: Martin Kepplinger: That's a contradiction and it might end up in *not* selecting relays, whos operators care a lot about security. If you care a lot about security you can use OfflineMasterKeys and keep your identity for a very long time and have no uptime

Re: [tor-relays] FallbackDirectoryMirrors selection criteria "uptime"

Martin Kepplinger: > That's a contradiction and it might end up in *not* selecting relays, > whos operators care a lot about security. If you care a lot about security you can use OfflineMasterKeys and keep your identity for a very long time and have no uptime problem. I added:

Re: [tor-relays] Individual Operator Exit Probability Threshold

Thanks Tim, this is the general idea of "If you build it they will come." I simply don't want to be a risk. John On Sep 22, 2017, at 08:19, teor > wrote: On 22 Sep 2017, at 23:04, John Ricketts > wrote:

[tor-relays] FallbackDirectoryMirrors selection criteria "uptime"

hi, Fallback directory mirrors [1] seem to be selected (if the need should arise, according to release planning and whatnot) with criteria "uptime", among others. And it's only this criteria I'm thinking about here: Now, in the wiki we have advice on how to improve relay security, and among

Re: [tor-relays] Individual Operator Exit Probability Threshold

> On 22 Sep 2017, at 23:04, John Ricketts wrote: > > All, > > I have brought this question up in meetings in Seattle and other places so > some of you may have already heard me ask this question. So, at risk of > repeating the question for some... here goes. > > I am

Re: [tor-relays] abuse email for non-exit relay (masergy)

> On 22 Sep 2017, at 23:03, relay 000 wrote: > >> Someone is using the hidden service rendezvous protocol to ask non-exit >> relays to scan non-tor IP addresses. > > wow, people can misuse my *non*-exit relay to scan (aka send a TCP SYN > packet) other systems on the

[tor-relays] Individual Operator Exit Probability Threshold

All, I have brought this question up in meetings in Seattle and other places so some of you may have already heard me ask this question. So, at risk of repeating the question for some... here goes. I am about to fire up more Exit Relays and if I do so I will jump from my roughly 3% of Exit

Re: [tor-relays] abuse email for non-exit relay (masergy)

> Someone is using the hidden service rendezvous protocol to ask non-exit > relays to scan non-tor IP addresses. wow, people can misuse my *non*-exit relay to scan (aka send a TCP SYN packet) other systems on the internet? ___ tor-relays mailing list

Re: [tor-relays] bug messages in my relay's notices.log

> On 22 Sep 2017, at 21:24, Scott Bennett wrote: > > nusenu wrote: > >> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/23551 >> > Thanks for the pointer. I'm glad it has been reported, but I still > have no sense of what in tor is

Re: [tor-relays] abuse email for non-exit relay (masergy)

> On 22 Sep 2017, at 16:41, x9p wrote: > > >> >> There are two ways this can happen: >> >> Someone set up a tor relay on the "client", and your relay connected >> to it. >> >> Someone is using the hidden service rendezvous protocol to ask non-exit >> relays to scan

Re: [tor-relays] bug messages in my relay's notices.log

nusenu wrote: > https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/23551 > Thanks for the pointer. I'm glad it has been reported, but I still have no sense of what in tor is malfunctioning because the compression has failed. Are user cells lost? Do user connections

Re: [tor-relays] bug messages in my relay's notices.log

https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/23551 -- https://mastodon.social/@nusenu https://twitter.com/nusenu_ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org

[tor-relays] bug messages in my relay's notices.log

I've gotten a couple of these sets of messages in the last few hours. Sep 22 05:13:17.366 [warn] tor_bug_occurred_: Bug: src/common/compress.c:576: tor_compress_process: Non-fatal assertion !((rv == TOR_COMPRESS_OK) && *in_len == in_len_orig && *out_len == out_len_orig) failed. (on Tor

Re: [tor-relays] abuse email for non-exit relay (masergy)

> > There are two ways this can happen: > > Someone set up a tor relay on the "client", and your relay connected > to it. > > Someone is using the hidden service rendezvous protocol to ask non-exit > relays to scan non-tor IP addresses. Specifying a remote address is a > feature of the protocol.