Re: [tor-relays] Relays operators meetup

2017-12-26 Thread Nicolas Braud-Santoni 
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 10:20:31PM +0100, Nicolas Braud-Santoni wrote:
> Hi !
> 
> (Sorry for the late announcement, I somehow forgot to fire off the email...)
> 
> The Tor relays operators meetup, at 34C4, will be TOMORROW (day 1),
> from 18.30 to 20.10, in lecture room 11 (in CCL, 2nd floor) :
> 
>   
> https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/wiki/index.php/Session:Tor_relays_operators_meetup


PS: Quick reminder too about the more-general Tor Q, on day 3 (10pm to 
midnight):
https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/wiki/index.php/Session:Tor_Q%26A


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

[tor-relays] Relays operators meetup

2017-12-26 Thread Nicolas Braud-Santoni 
Hi !

(Sorry for the late announcement, I somehow forgot to fire off the email...)

The Tor relays operators meetup, at 34C4, will be TOMORROW (day 1),
from 18.30 to 20.10, in lecture room 11 (in CCL, 2nd floor) :

  
https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/wiki/index.php/Session:Tor_relays_operators_meetup


Best,

  nicoo


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Decline in relays

2017-12-26 Thread Gary Smith 
I can only spare a few GB or so day from my home internet, so I set the
ACCOUNTING MAX daily limit to 3GB (in + out = 6GB) and RELAYBANDWIDTHRATE
to 200KB (BURST 400KB), after much experimenting this was the balance
between not hibernating before the 24hr are over and leaving enough bytes
left over for me + my house 4K netflix use.

Recently, 3GB daily limit hasn't been enough to last the 24 hours some days
it went offline at the afternoon, I raised ACCOUNTINGMAX to 4GB and it
seems fine.

Perhaps this is related to the recently trends (I am non-exit, middle
only). Unfortunately I do have to reboot my relay once a week or so due to
updates or other people I live with messing with the home router's reset
switch when they deem their netflix over wifi experience to be poor so I
will probably never get the guard flag.

On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Iomega  wrote:

> I run a small relay and it went down intermittently during Nov 1 to Nov
> 25, with a lot of hiccups [1] since I started it earlier in the year, which
> may or may not be due to this attack. It is my first and only relay so I
> cannot relate.
>
> What I can say is that during most of that time in November, the relay was
> running, the instance was running, tor was running (if with an older
> version), there were no traffic restrictions I can say, etc.
>
> Obviously after that period the relay lost its Guard flag, and since
> 0.3.1.9 the relay it seems to be catching up quickly, actually with much
> more traffic than any time before.
>
> In the past days I did a lot of cleanup so I cannot provide logs (I barely
> log notices, not even that if there are no issues).
>
> [1] https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/1FA8F638298645BE58AC9052766808
> 89CB795A94
>
>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Decline in relays
> Local Time: December 26, 2017 11:16 AM
> UTC Time: December 26, 2017 11:16 AM
> From: zwie...@quantentunnel.de
> To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
>
> Am 23-Oct-17 um 15:32 schrieb David Goulet:
>
> Since July 2017, there has been a steady decline in relays from ~7k
> to now ~6.5k. This is a bit unusual that is we don't see often such
> a steady behavior of relays going offline (at least that I can
> remember...).
> It could certainly be something normal here. However, we shouldn't
> rule out a bug in tor as well. The steadyness of the decline makes
> me a bit more worried than usual.
>
>
>
> That being said, I don't have an easy way to list which relays went
> offline during the decline (since July basically) to see if a
> common pattern emerges.
> So few things. First, if anyone on this list noticed that their
> relay went off the consensus while still having tor running, it is
> a good time to inform this thread :).
> Second, anyone could have an idea of what possibly is going on that
> is have one or more theories. Even better, if you have some tooling
> to try to list which relays went offline, that would be *awesome*.
>
>
> a) Please find two pictures which show tap[1] and ntor[2] in 2016 and
> 2017 for a certain relay. Obviously the number of tap/ntor increases
> since July 2017.
>
> b) Taps becoming hourly massive on all my guards since October 2017.
>
> c) An other relay had the largest amount of taps. It received 6
> million taps. The tap flood took 65 minutes and the tor cpu power went
> up from 60% before to 120-210% during the flood.
>
> I can not prove but because of outbound packet abuse letters from an
> ISP I start thinking if this is an other measure to damage guard/hsdir
> flags. Beside the enormous consumption of cpu resources.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> [TAP 1] https://i.imgur.com/jDj3M5W.jpg
> [NTOR 2] https://i.imgur.com/jDncdMx.jpg
>
> --
>
> Cheers, Felix
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v2
>
> iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJaQi/cAAoJEF1W24InZUQdA48QAOy8CnnJGMkl+d9B844JE4uE
> vZ2L96OSFOCl7Au3l+V/dYIvgdMUUe4ju8hQHhzB0918IY8Y4lMngTTgptVfwhKv
> cb6RB6Ib8/1zfzLtmrEn6pdiHoUY2qlm7xB6lzsfaz3JT+KOTq1adzV9DSQAAkNV
> Cp0+jdpYX/X3T7OOXzSxUDmKiqaMu7K181agMeyybUFzIPEZgmRCdnYNHmD2W2aH
> zjBfSm5J1OncFcs5GwmtCKCUq5DVrjjmYZHLB4E91ExQafwcqLYfqAQDqh8ui0tW
> W9//fkgPxcNgQ5hOQq2Ucf7cZJ1I12fKCApBYtfgfq91sCtt2+sozNnr4u5d5Jxy
> JxiWX/t5MEWjvXcAy3jOYoPnTiuDHwG6EYWjomU+RpZwqJkdV00043a8F9UzYe67
> O7/pRcDSZe3MdL7CkLZcirNMS0dSHPlxLWJCd0XlWPs5d8aW/F8kRFndQoisN7c7
> zxeFFUs9/NRPCCXrzymX/rTgUtlvZ8xKjQ0K8v/giLXoNxTf02P5FK4pcD3Bu47m
> qGTqfiaBFywDvFA5+icDZICJqFxtBG+6W0tWO8K79w+oKmqEyk6TBKhZDZWcH1K4
> Qu62tkOZs7Qp8jKz6M8kYWsr+ATO8+IWz6o/xWTZJPVeir8qsZShR71Xz4kGftu2
> 1Sar8xKb/lw+xQAOoV27
> =Nqx3
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> --
>
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>
>
>
> ___
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>

Re: [tor-relays] bridges

2017-12-26 Thread I 
 https://www.torproject.org/docs/bridges


 "If you need to get bridges, you can get a bridge by visiting 
https://bridges.torproject.org/ with your web browser.

You can also get bridges by sending mail to brid...@bridges.torproject.org with 
the line "get bridges" by itself in the body of the mail. You'll need to send 
this request from a Gmail, Riseup!, or Yahoo! account, though — we only accept 
these providers because otherwise we make it too easy for an attacker to make a 
lot of email addresses and learn about all the bridges"


___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

[tor-relays] bridges

2017-12-26 Thread Mr Xxx 
<<< text/html; charset=UTF-8: Unrecognized >>>
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Decline in relays

2017-12-26 Thread Iomega 
I run a small relay and it went down intermittently during Nov 1 to Nov 25, 
with a lot of hiccups [1] since I started it earlier in the year, which may or 
may not be due to this attack. It is my first and only relay so I cannot relate.

What I can say is that during most of that time in November, the relay was 
running, the instance was running, tor was running (if with an older version), 
there were no traffic restrictions I can say, etc.

Obviously after that period the relay lost its Guard flag, and since 0.3.1.9 
the relay it seems to be catching up quickly, actually with much more traffic 
than any time before.

In the past days I did a lot of cleanup so I cannot provide logs (I barely log 
notices, not even that if there are no issues).

[1] 
https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/1FA8F638298645BE58AC905276680889CB795A94

>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Decline in relays
> Local Time: December 26, 2017 11:16 AM
> UTC Time: December 26, 2017 11:16 AM
> From: zwie...@quantentunnel.de
> To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Am 23-Oct-17 um 15:32 schrieb David Goulet:
>
>> Since July 2017, there has been a steady decline in relays from ~7k
>> to now ~6.5k. This is a bit unusual that is we don't see often such
>> a steady behavior of relays going offline (at least that I can
>> remember...).
>> It could certainly be something normal here. However, we shouldn't
>> rule out a bug in tor as well. The steadyness of the decline makes
>> me a bit more worried than usual.
>
>> That being said, I don't have an easy way to list which relays went
>> offline during the decline (since July basically) to see if a
>> common pattern emerges.
>> So few things. First, if anyone on this list noticed that their
>> relay went off the consensus while still having tor running, it is
>> a good time to inform this thread :).
>> Second, anyone could have an idea of what possibly is going on that
>> is have one or more theories. Even better, if you have some tooling
>> to try to list which relays went offline, that would be awesome.
>
> a) Please find two pictures which show tap[1] and ntor[2] in 2016 and
> 2017 for a certain relay. Obviously the number of tap/ntor increases
> since July 2017.
>
> b) Taps becoming hourly massive on all my guards since October 2017.
>
> c) An other relay had the largest amount of taps. It received 6
> million taps. The tap flood took 65 minutes and the tor cpu power went
> up from 60% before to 120-210% during the flood.
>
> I can not prove but because of outbound packet abuse letters from an
> ISP I start thinking if this is an other measure to damage guard/hsdir
> flags. Beside the enormous consumption of cpu resources.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> [TAP 1] https://i.imgur.com/jDj3M5W.jpg
> [NTOR 2] https://i.imgur.com/jDncdMx.jpg
>
> ---
>
> Cheers, Felix
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v2
>
> iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJaQi/cAAoJEF1W24InZUQdA48QAOy8CnnJGMkl+d9B844JE4uE
> vZ2L96OSFOCl7Au3l+V/dYIvgdMUUe4ju8hQHhzB0918IY8Y4lMngTTgptVfwhKv
> cb6RB6Ib8/1zfzLtmrEn6pdiHoUY2qlm7xB6lzsfaz3JT+KOTq1adzV9DSQAAkNV
> Cp0+jdpYX/X3T7OOXzSxUDmKiqaMu7K181agMeyybUFzIPEZgmRCdnYNHmD2W2aH
> zjBfSm5J1OncFcs5GwmtCKCUq5DVrjjmYZHLB4E91ExQafwcqLYfqAQDqh8ui0tW
> W9//fkgPxcNgQ5hOQq2Ucf7cZJ1I12fKCApBYtfgfq91sCtt2+sozNnr4u5d5Jxy
> JxiWX/t5MEWjvXcAy3jOYoPnTiuDHwG6EYWjomU+RpZwqJkdV00043a8F9UzYe67
> O7/pRcDSZe3MdL7CkLZcirNMS0dSHPlxLWJCd0XlWPs5d8aW/F8kRFndQoisN7c7
> zxeFFUs9/NRPCCXrzymX/rTgUtlvZ8xKjQ0K8v/giLXoNxTf02P5FK4pcD3Bu47m
> qGTqfiaBFywDvFA5+icDZICJqFxtBG+6W0tWO8K79w+oKmqEyk6TBKhZDZWcH1K4
> Qu62tkOZs7Qp8jKz6M8kYWsr+ATO8+IWz6o/xWTZJPVeir8qsZShR71Xz4kGftu2
> 1Sar8xKb/lw+xQAOoV27
> =Nqx3
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> ---
>
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Decline in relays

2017-12-26 Thread Felix 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256


Am 23-Oct-17 um 15:32 schrieb David Goulet:
> Since July 2017, there has been a steady decline in relays from ~7k
> to now ~6.5k. This is a bit unusual that is we don't see often such
> a steady behavior of relays going offline (at least that I can
> remember...).
> 
> It could certainly be something normal here. However, we shouldn't
> rule out a bug in tor as well. The steadyness of the decline makes
> me a bit more worried than usual.

> That being said, I don't have an easy way to list which relays went
> offline during the decline (since July basically) to see if a
> common pattern emerges.
> 
> So few things. First, if anyone on this list noticed that their
> relay went off the consensus while still having tor running, it is
> a good time to inform this thread :).
> 
> Second, anyone could have an idea of what possibly is going on that
> is have one or more theories. Even better, if you have some tooling
> to try to list which relays went offline, that would be _awesome_.

a) Please find two pictures which show tap[1] and ntor[2] in 2016 and
2017 for a certain relay. Obviously the number of tap/ntor increases
since July 2017.

b) Taps becoming hourly massive on all my guards since October 2017.

c) An other relay had the largest amount of taps. It received 6
million taps. The tap flood took 65 minutes and the tor cpu power went
up from 60% before to 120-210% during the flood.

I can not prove but because of outbound packet abuse letters from an
ISP I start thinking if this is an other measure to damage guard/hsdir
flags. Beside the enormous consumption of cpu resources.

I hope this helps.

[TAP 1] https://i.imgur.com/jDj3M5W.jpg
[NTOR 2] https://i.imgur.com/jDncdMx.jpg

- -- 
Cheers, Felix
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2

iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJaQi/cAAoJEF1W24InZUQdA48QAOy8CnnJGMkl+d9B844JE4uE
vZ2L96OSFOCl7Au3l+V/dYIvgdMUUe4ju8hQHhzB0918IY8Y4lMngTTgptVfwhKv
cb6RB6Ib8/1zfzLtmrEn6pdiHoUY2qlm7xB6lzsfaz3JT+KOTq1adzV9DSQAAkNV
Cp0+jdpYX/X3T7OOXzSxUDmKiqaMu7K181agMeyybUFzIPEZgmRCdnYNHmD2W2aH
zjBfSm5J1OncFcs5GwmtCKCUq5DVrjjmYZHLB4E91ExQafwcqLYfqAQDqh8ui0tW
W9//fkgPxcNgQ5hOQq2Ucf7cZJ1I12fKCApBYtfgfq91sCtt2+sozNnr4u5d5Jxy
JxiWX/t5MEWjvXcAy3jOYoPnTiuDHwG6EYWjomU+RpZwqJkdV00043a8F9UzYe67
O7/pRcDSZe3MdL7CkLZcirNMS0dSHPlxLWJCd0XlWPs5d8aW/F8kRFndQoisN7c7
zxeFFUs9/NRPCCXrzymX/rTgUtlvZ8xKjQ0K8v/giLXoNxTf02P5FK4pcD3Bu47m
qGTqfiaBFywDvFA5+icDZICJqFxtBG+6W0tWO8K79w+oKmqEyk6TBKhZDZWcH1K4
Qu62tkOZs7Qp8jKz6M8kYWsr+ATO8+IWz6o/xWTZJPVeir8qsZShR71Xz4kGftu2
1Sar8xKb/lw+xQAOoV27
=Nqx3
-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] Relay Search bandwidth graph update issue

2017-12-26 Thread teor 

> On 26 Dec 2017, at 19:39, Ralph Seichter  wrote:
> 
> On 25.12.2017 23:54, teor wrote:
> 
>> It looks like you have encountered that gap, at least on the
>> higher-resolution graphs. You might want to check the
>> monthly or yearly graphs to see if they still work.
> 
> I found that the "1 month" and "3 months" graphs have not been updated
> beyond December 13 or 17, respectively. Graphs "1 year" and "5 years"
> display more current data.
> 
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/24155 is marked as an
> enhancement instead of a bug, which I assume means low priority, so I
> wonder when the monthly graphs might be back in working order again?

The ticket says the graphs will be removed once most relays stop
reporting 4-hourly data, and start reporting daily data. I expect this
will happen around the 0.3.2 stable release.

This will make them consistent with the consensus weights, which are
also partly based on daily data (and partly based on data that is
recalculated hourly, from a dataset that is updated every day or so).

T

--
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B
ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
xmpp: teor at torproject dot org






signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] 34c3

2017-12-26 Thread Will Scott 
Relevant sessions are:
https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/wiki/index.php/Session:Tor_relays_operators_meetup
https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/wiki/index.php/Session:Tor_Q%26A

There is also an unofficial tor assembly in Hall 3:
https://34c3.c3nav.de/l/tor

--Will

On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 09:16:36AM +0100, Felix wrote:
> Hi everybody
> 
> Is there an assembly or room for a concourse of Tor people?
> Some coordinates like room number and utc would be apprechiated.
> Hope to see you folks there :)
> 
> -- 
> Cheers, Felix
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Relay Search bandwidth graph update issue

2017-12-26 Thread Ralph Seichter 
On 25.12.2017 23:54, teor wrote:

> It looks like you have encountered that gap, at least on the
> higher-resolution graphs. You might want to check the
> monthly or yearly graphs to see if they still work.

I found that the "1 month" and "3 months" graphs have not been updated
beyond December 13 or 17, respectively. Graphs "1 year" and "5 years"
display more current data.

https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/24155 is marked as an
enhancement instead of a bug, which I assume means low priority, so I
wonder when the monthly graphs might be back in working order again?

-Ralph
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

[tor-relays] 34c3

2017-12-26 Thread Felix 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

Hi everybody

Is there an assembly or room for a concourse of Tor people?
Some coordinates like room number and utc would be apprechiated.
Hope to see you folks there :)

- -- 
Cheers, Felix
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=L7/F
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays