Re: [tor-relays] Circuit Creation Madness: Anyone else still experiencing (extremely) excessive clients / (possibly) modified relays creating millions upon millions of circuits?

[William Kane <ttallink@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Roger:

>For the variants of the overloads that we've seen so far, they are
>done via Tor, i.e. your relay doesn't actually know who is starting
>the circuits, so those logs would be at best useless. (We built an
>anonymity system, and now it keeps people anonymous. We can't be *too*
>unhappy here. :)

I'm fully aware of that, but wouldn't it take a "malicious" guard in
order to forward all these circuit creation requests anyway?

Last time I checked, the authorities were configured to vote on /
publish reasonable thresholds of consecutive connections and circuit
creation requests for relays to adapt (however most of the mitigation
only takes place on guards, which makes sense), so even if a client is
doing all this and we obviously can't get their IP address, the guard
would have to be configured in a way that allows this scenario to
happen in the first place, in my opinion making them bad relays -
right now my relay only takes place as a middle in a circuit, so
figuring out the guard is possible (not considering the onion service
scenario right now).

- William

On 23/03/2021, Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 07:54:43PM +0000, William Kane wrote:
>> Sorry for being quite noisy recently but I really need to know how
>> many people are suffering from the same madness I am encountering
>> right now.
>>
>> Quick excerpt from the log:
>>
>> Mar 22 09:48:10 <hostname_redacted> tor[pid_redacted]: Mar 22
>> 09:48:10.000 [warn] Your computer is too slow to handle this many
>> circuit creation requests! Please consider using the
>> MaxAdvertisedBandwidth config option or choosing a more restricted
>> exit policy. [12420 similar message(s) suppressed in last 120 seconds]
>
> Yes, it could help to hear if many people are experiencing these log
> messages or just a few.
>
> There are several known situations where the log messages could happen to
> a small subset of the relays at any given time. For example, if somebody
> is trying to flood a particular onion service, then the six or eight
> HSDirs for that onion address for that day could see a lot of overload
> (which would last for as much as that day), and also the introduction
> points listed in the descriptors could see a lot of overload (which
> would last a lot less than a day probably).
>
>> Might be smart to add some code which, if this scenario is triggered,
>> lists offenders by hashes of their signing keys (if relay), or IP
>> addresses (if client).
>
> For the variants of the overloads that we've seen so far, they are
> done via Tor, i.e. your relay doesn't actually know who is starting
> the circuits, so those logs would be at best useless. (We built an
> anonymity system, and now it keeps people anonymous. We can't be *too*
> unhappy here. :)
>
> I think the long term answer for these attacks are the options outlined
> by George in this blog post:
> https://blog.torproject.org/stop-the-onion-denial
>
> I'm especially interested in the proof-of-work variant, which doesn't
> need an interface where the human does stuff, doesn't need to be hooked
> together with a global ecash system that everybody wants a piece of, etc:
> https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/proposals/327-pow-over-intro.txt
>
> But as they say, more work remains.
>
> --Roger
>
> _______________________________________________
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>
_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays