New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Ah yeah, for exit nodes it's a different story altogether.
Not what I am seeing, but these days we have much lower turnover and it might help.
In the past, most DDoS was against game servers, this is why we disallowed those, but people are running them anyway as we are only looking into it if there are problems. I don't recall any DDoS against a Tor node ever, but in the EU there are many of those so maybe we have been spared as people were going to OVH or similar. Also, exit nodes should be run by organizations, not random people, those are needed only to make sure at least some of the path is randomized.
True, but if I am taking an offer, then I am looking at the traffic allocation and provider history regarding throttling or terminations. If the history is negative, then it means traffic is heavily oversold and I stay away even for "unlimited" traffic, if not, then I make sure I use the traffic I pay for, it is not my duty to care for the provider's resources for as long as they are offering a certain chunk in the package.
Yes, unlimited is iffy, unless you are OVH and a few others, but those are already full of nodes, however, if it says on the tin 20 tb, then I will be using 19.5, shaped to be uniformly used and not create spike issues.
DDoS attacks against Tor are actually common, but it's always a low-bandwidth layer 7 attack so the hosting provider won't feel it at all. It just involves building too many circuits which increases CPU and memory use, effectively slowing the relay.
In fact, there's one going on right now: https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/219382/mitigating-the-ongoing-ddos-attack-against-tor-relays/p1