Re: [tor-relays] (no subject)

[Roger Dingledine]

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 10:17:26PM +0200, Ahmed Ahmed wrote:
> [empty message]

I just set the 'moderated' bit on this person, so further messages (after
these two) will need manual attention before they make it to the list.

Hopefully that will keep the signal-to-noise ratio on the right side
of the line. :)

Sorry for the troubles,
--Roger

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

[tor-relays] (no subject)

[Ahmed Ahmed]

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

[tor-relays] (no subject)

[Ahmed Ahmed]

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

Re: [tor-relays] bride one host

[lists]

Am 22.03.2019 08:19, schrieb Roger Dingledine:

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 02:43:13AM +0100, li...@for-privacy.net wrote:

Can you run a bride and a middle-relay together on a host?
I mean for the safety of users. IPv6 is usually a /64 network and the
various IPv4 are usually also from a subnet.


Answer #1: if they're using different IP addresses, sure, go for it.


Different IP are a must, that's clear anyway.

But...
Normally you get from the provider:
some IPv4 fron same subnet:
203.0.113.111
203.0.113.222
203.0.113.333

and one IPv6 Prefix:
2001:0DB8:123:456::/64


After reading that from your link below, I realize it's a bad idea to 
use similar IP's for Bridge and Gateway.


I came up with the idea, because my server still has a lot of resources 
available. But I do not have traffic anymore. 2 Tor instaces consume all 
my 20TB.



https://blog.torproject.org/research-problems-ten-ways-discover-tor-bridges

Thanks. That's exactly the stuff I'm looking for. ;-)

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

Re: [tor-relays] IRC meetup time poll

[Colin Childs]

Hello everyone,

Based on the feedback from the poll, the next meeting will take place on 
Thursday, April 4th @ 22:00UTC. 

I will send a reminder email out on April 1st with the agenda pad as usual.

Thanks for voting in the poll! 

> On Mar 13, 2019, at 7:32 PM, Colin Childs  wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> Just a friendly reminder that we will be closing this poll on Friday, so 
> please be sure you fill in your preferred times ASAP!
> 
> Currently, the most popular time appears to be 23:00UTC.
> 
> I hope you’re all having a great week! 
> 
>> On Mar 8, 2019, at 11:15 AM, Colin Childs > > wrote:
>> 
>> Hi everyone,
>> 
>> We are looking at changing the current IRC relay operator meetup time, as 
>> well as adding additional times throughout the month. 
>> 
>> I have created a poll at https://xoyondo.com/dp/oyUpcPqhnnJ6TWz 
>>  to collect time preferences for the 
>> next meetup (all times are GMT+0).
>> 
>> Please add your time preferences by March 15th (1 week from today) to help 
>> us better select times that work for you! 
>> 
>> Thanks, I hope you all have a great weekend! 
>> ___
>> 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

[tor-relays] New Relay: ShawnWebb01

[Shawn Webb]

Hey all,

A few days ago, I put up a new relay on a PC Engines device running
HardenedBSD 13-CURRENt/amd64:

https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/57869F7458002476F6AC78F7A61C960CBA94497F

I should update ContactInfo soon to reflect the ContactInfo format
nusenu would like relays to use.

IPv4 address of the relay comes from Verizon FiOS and IPv6 comes from
Hurricane Electric's TunnelBroker.

Please let me know if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.

Thanks,

-- 
Shawn Webb
Cofounder and Security Engineer
HardenedBSD

Tor-ified Signal:+1 443-546-8752
Tor+XMPP+OTR:latt...@is.a.hacker.sx
GPG Key ID:  0x6A84658F52456EEE
GPG Key Fingerprint: 2ABA B6BD EF6A F486 BE89  3D9E 6A84 658F 5245 6EEE


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] bride one host

[Toralf Förster]

On 3/22/19 8:19 AM, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> https://blog.torproject.org/research-problems-ten-ways-discover-tor-bridges

Which means, to avoid few attack vector, a Tor relay operator might run a 
bridge which points to its own relay always?

-- 
Toralf
PGP C4EACDDE 0076E94E




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

Re: [tor-relays] bride one host

[Roger Dingledine]

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 02:43:13AM +0100, li...@for-privacy.net wrote:
> Can you run a bride and a middle-relay together on a host?
> I mean for the safety of users. IPv6 is usually a /64 network and the
> various IPv4 are usually also from a subnet.

Answer #1: if they're using different IP addresses, sure, go for it.

Answer #2: if they're using the same IP address, you can do it
technically, but it's probably not a good move.

Some years ago, it used to be that China blocked Tor relays and bridges
by blocking the particular IP:port they listened on.

But in the past year or two, they switched to just blackholing the IP
address if there's a Tor thing on it.

So, that means when they learn the relay IP address and blackhole it,
if your bridge is on that same IP address, the bridge becomes unreachable
too. Not the best outcome.

And, while you're thinking about bridge blocking, here are many other
angles to learn about:
https://blog.torproject.org/research-problems-ten-ways-discover-tor-bridges

Hope that helps,
--Roger

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