I suddenly have blocked nodes. These are trusted Tor exits from people I know. (From Germany F3Netze, Zwiebelfreunde, to-surf-and-protect.net)

2020-11-29 19:04:22.121 [P2P5] INFO global src/p2p/net_node.inl:266 Host 185.220.101.19 blocked.

2020-11-29 19:18:49.769 [P2P2] INFO global src/p2p/net_node.inl:266 Host 185.220.101.194 blocked.

2020-11-29 19:35:33.968 [P2P5] INFO global src/p2p/net_node.inl:266 Host 185.220.100.245 blocked.

People have their monerd running via gate exits? Not hidden service

*Tor exits

185.220.101.0/24, 185.220.102.0/24, 185.220.100.0/24 = F3Netze, Zwiebelfreunde, to-surf-and-protect.net

<boldsuck> Last 2 days complete: Unable to send transaction(s) to tor - no suitable outbound connections :-(

Some asshole is continually sending bad data to all nodes via tor, so those nodes block the incoming IP - the exit node.

You can disable the banning on bad pow if you like, it's not a flood (yet).

This is weak point of monero, checking PoW is expensive.

Also, if you know a tor exit operator, that should most definietly *not* cause you to trust traffic coming from these hosts.

banning exit nodes wouldn't affect that "no suitable outbound" condition - those are to hidden services

so exit nodes aren't involved

I haven't seen any I2P connections on my node in a while

Yes, they're... invisible...

I'll get my coat

Is unban <IP> permanent?

No.

default the ban is for 24h. Unban same 24h

No.

Unban just unbans. If the hosts does something funny, it gets banned again.

OK. ;-)

@hyc The exits flag nodes can also be used as guard or middle

doesn't matter, in the context of what monerod talks to

The exits flag nodes can also be used as guard or middleyes

bans only affect the address where a p2p or rpc connection comes from

connecting to a hidden service means monerod will see the connection coming from the tor daemon

Yes I know

so what is your point?

accidentally came repeat

A scammer just invited me ;-)

@moneromooo It is clear that I do not trust the exit traffic. Have some myself. I only meant that because we currently have a lot of bad relays in the Tor network.

<Morrison[m]> tries to scam people

nice:

user@tor-proxy:~/.bitmonero$ /home/user/monero/monerod print_cn|grep 'Tor'

INC : Tor no 3f5e3a340fd7bb88 0 5539(32)/3826(32) normal 286 0 0 0 0

OUT : Tor no 4116f5fd8c74cd1a 0 4475(28)/276(28) normal 28 0 0 0 0

OUT : Tor no 5e09ef9a3324d62b 0 4265(41)/2704(42) normal 66 0 0 0 0

OUT : Tor no 564d4acd2f0b046b 0 3953(41)/4944(42) normal 366 0 0 0 0

INC : Tor no 9ce47f4b1a44f3d9 0 38261(10)/5000(17) normal 553 0 0 0 0

OUT : Tor no 1c0cdfd7d91f88a5 0 5101(20)/28528(6) normal 266 0 0 0 0

OUT : Tor no 20c0b4f8d86377b0 0 7909(2)/7462(2) normal 669 0 0 0 0

OUT : Tor no 94697c35765bc4f8 0 8718(35)/194931(4) normal 753 0 0 0 0

OUT : Tor no 82cd07e43de290be 0 6244(115)/84688(107) normal 467 0 0 0 0

OUT : Tor no 4e304e8d0fbb23f8 0 8337(41)/87766(42) normal 782 0 0 0 0

INC : Tor no 26e15db1e3b941a5 0 48271(0)/6759(42) normal 938 0 0 0 0

OUT : Tor no 5f58434aa7bc6341 0 8666(41)/8659(42) normal 957 0 0 0 0

OUT : Tor no 5fa25f69fa22c745 0 9582(42)/85869(42) normal 1070 0 0 0 0

INC : Tor no 70d1041a528768a6 0 11522(20)/9657(20) normal 1373 0 0 0 0

let's see how long

Don't spam please. Use a paste site if you need to.

OK

The lost outbound connections now had nothing to do with the ban. I've had a few days. There are still not enough nodes with --anonymous-inbound

Tomorrow I will switch my other node from stagenet to mainnet

yeah that's what I was saying the whole time. the monerod bans have nothing to do with outbound tor or i2p connections

New guy to monero here. I've got the Linux GUI wallet running on my laptop, the Linux GUI wallet/miner running on my desktop, and the Linux CLI miner running on my home server, all linked to the same wallet. When it comes to mobile wallets though, which one do you guys trust the most or recommend? Obviously I can import my existing wallet on the mobile app as well with my seed, so that everything is linked to the same wallet. I'm just curious which

app I should go with.

I hear monerujo and cake wallet are good.

I installed cake but haven't set it up yet.

As long as you don't get an impersonator one.

I grabbed it from the Play Store, so I'm assuming it's the legit one. I can double check though, verify with the URLs listed on getmonero.org

I figure since the mobile app is gonna be third party, better be a little more discerning about which one I give my seed to.

just because it's on the play store doesn't mean it's not an impersonator

there can be more than one there

I would be hesitant to keep much on a phone

based on...........feeling

nioc: Agreed, there's nobody around here that even really knows what crypto currency is, so the likelihood of actually using the mobile app to perform a transaction is pretty low, and even the apps listed on getmonero.org are third party so you're probably right, hold off on mobile unless I find an actual need for it.

the wallets moneromooo suggested are good but sometimes there are imposters on the store as well

they get taken down and reappear

nioc: I uninstalled the one I had and followed the link to the first party website and clicked the Android link on their website, but haven't set it up yet.

By "followed the link", I mean followed the link posted on getmonero.org

you can also set up a different wallet on the phone from the one you already have

nioc: That wouldn't be a bad idea, except I'd have to move the money between the wallets if I actually needed to perform a transaction of any kind, but it would be more secure.

transactions are easy and......cheap :)

I'm gonna let my two miners run for a little while and see if anything comes of it. I just got curious about Monero, its privacy features, and the fact that you can feasibly mine it without an ASIC, so thought I'd check it out. I try to put 15% of each paycheck into some sort of crypto, Monero may just become part of that, especially if there are ways I can actually spend it for goods and services.

I do like the fact that when I look at charts, with one exception in 2018, its value hasn't been all over the place as much as some other coins like BTC.

I guess since I do have a Bitpay card, if I wanted to hold some Monero and needed to spend it, I could always use a service like changelly to send some XMR to my Bitpay wallet and have it arrive as ETH or something.

I assume from what you said that you are not pool mining but instead are solo mining

Solo yes.

in that case the chances are slim, more like a lottery

which I guess is ok cause it still takes a while to get a small payout from a pool

I know someone who mined 2 blocks solo mining

Well the home server runs 24/7/365 anyway, so I just set up a systemd service for monerod and set it to have a lower priority than other things like Plex.

I figure if it's running and sucking up juice anyway, might as well take a chance on earning a little from it.

So to join a pool, I would need to use something other than the CLI monerod so that I could configure it for a pool, wouldn't I?

xmrig is a good miner, should get a little more hashrate than the wallet

they have a wizard that will configure the parameters for you

you can chage the # of threads from what they give you if you like

you need to put your wallet address and the pool's site address

the default donation is 5% which you can easily reduce to 1%

nioc: Got xmrig downloaded, created a systemd service file for it, reading through the config.json right now.

There are many algos there, monero is rx/0

#monero-pools

sorry, user error there. was trying to /join

Got xmrig configured to mine for minexmr.com, seems to be running fine.

Not sure how effective it'll be, I'm guessing it probably has to download the entire blockchain first.

sethsimmons, when did bitcoin get a 2 MB blocksize?

Gerowen no need to dl blockchain

Just put the address that you are mining to on their site and you should see your hashes being accepted

nioc: I noticed that, it's going to town working away.

Did have to remove the "monero:" from the front of my address for it to take it, but then it was off to the races.

\o/

Hmmm, it's only using 3 cores on both rigs, even though I added -t 6 and -t 8, respectively, so it could use all the cores on each of those machines.

Well it appears that way anyway, 3 cores pegged and the rest kinda idling.

I set them in the config file which is not how you are running them

also note that each thread needs 2 MB of L3 cache to run

but that will not effect how many actually run

Hi, guys!

Does anyone have some testnet XMR?

you just get no benefit running more threads

(not stagenet)

Then I guess I'm g2g, my stats are showing up on the worker stats page with a pending balance, so I guess the key now is to just let them hammer at it. Thanks for squaring me away with everything, :-)

And what you said about the L3 cache is the reason, the 6 core is an old Phenom II X6 1045T with 6MB of L3, and the 8 core is an FX 8370 with 8MB, neither of which have enough L3 cache for more than 3 threads. So that's why.

your welcome

Well, if nobody has any testnet XMR, could you just tell me - does xmr.to testnet faucet work for you?

I have a local fully-synced testnet node, but I could not receive any testnet monero from that faucet

Gerowen: my i5 which has 6MB of L3 cache will run all 4 cores, not that I get more HR than I get with 3 cores

and that 3rd core only gives me 1/2 the HR of the first 2 cause windows

Got it working across all 6 and 8 cores, respectively. How efficient it'll be on those additional cores, who knows. Apparently when I started it the first time experimenting, it made some default changes to the config file, because I noticed whole sections different from the default that I never changed. When I set up the living room desktop, I just copied the config from the server over, not knowing at the time it was different. I just restored both

to the default config file, manually plugged in the server and payment ID, and now they're both hammering on every CPU core, at a lower priority obviously so other, more important services won't be bothered.

Welp I'm out, take care everybody.

<gingeropolous "sethsimmons, when did bitcoin ge"> Woops... No one else caught that lmao, I need to update 0.0

Updated, thanks for the mention!

no worries. i got sucked into a bitcoin blockchain size wormhole and started convincing myself you were right

It's so freaking confusing with WU etc

I knew it was 1MB but reading through all the crap that SegWit throws in to give it a bigger block size without trigger block size nuts is annoying.

In other news my blog post got me unblocked by a maxi 😂

hey guys my monerod node was working fine until recently the 'height' is by 2 block behind than 'target_height'

from get_info response

'height': 2242012

'target_height': 2242014

is there any known issue of that?

Yes, are you running the latest verson v0.17.1.5?

If not please update, it contains some fixes for the ongoing attack causing that issue.

I am running v0.17.1.3

is it possible to set auto build via docker?

I'd still recommend updating, though that version should resolve that if you use a ban list as well as mentioned here:

hmm, v0.17.1.3 should be fine theoretically

igoris4: can you post the output of ./monerod status ?

logs are fine

I just need to add ban-list

please try v0.17.1.5 first if possible

ban list should not be necessary on v0.17.1.3

okey, I am upgrading to v0.17.1.5

so you say on the version v0.17.1.5 ban-list is not necessary right? selsta

try upgrading first and report back

you can also try deleting ~/.bitmonero/p2pstate.bin

after updating the version monerod logs seems to be fine: "Tou are now synchronized with the network. You may now start monero-wallet-cli."

igoris4: please report back if the issue happens again

but if I call get_info method it shows 'height': 2242039, and 'target_height': 2242041,

for some reason height is by 2 blocks behind of target_height

please try deleting p2pstate.bin

and then restart

deleted p2pstate.bin, restarted the node. 'height': 2242047, 'target_height': 2242049,

I can make the transaction

but I wonder why is the height behind target_height

can you post the output of ./monerod status?

someone is trolling and claiming higher target height

but if everything works correctly you can ignore it

if your node is synced target_height has no meaning, so you can ignore it

2020-11-30 17:40:10.592 I Monero 'Oxygen Orion' (v0.17.1.5-release)Error: Problem fetching info-- rpc_request: Height: 2242049/2242051 (99.9%) on mainnet, mining info unavailable, net hash 1.58 GH/s, v14, 0(out)+0(in) connections

hmm

I Monero 'Oxygen Orion' (v0.17.1.5-release)Error: Problem fetching info-- rpc_request: Height: 2242049/2242051 (99.9%) on mainnet, mining info unavailable, net hash 1.58 GH/s, v14, 0(out)+0(in) connections

I wonder why your node has this issue but other nodes don't

yeah, it was working just fine

you can try the ban list

probably wont help. I am currently running monero-wallet-rpc and monerod binaries on the same server

maybe I should use some trusted monerod. So monero-wallet-rpc would connect to that public node?

I don’t follow.

Adding the ban list is easy, I would give it a try.

so I added ban list

seems to be working fine now

thanks a lot! selsta

FenderQ: you're sure you have a dameon running at the expected address ?

I'm not sure, I'm just going by the docs

Ah, I see it's moneroworld... AFAIK this picks a random daemon. You've got good ones, and shit ones.

ah ok, thanks

Use your own if you can. Don't put yourself the mercy of random internet strangers :)

I find the monerod locks up my system at 100GB

once it is fully sync'd

so am using a remote node to dev with

built from 3942a1cd0 (HEAD -> release-v0.17, tag: v0.17.1.5, origin/release-v0.17) Merge pull request #7044

Hello everyone. How can I use the --ban-list command? I add it to the command, but should a file be pointed at?

yes, save the list as a textfile and then point the --ban-list parameter to it

selsta: has there been any new ideas on how to solve that issue other than a centralized ban list?

maybe static is a better term than centralized 🤔 maybe its both 🤷‍♂️

The ban list should not be necessary, the majority of nodes don't use it most likely.

kinghat[m]: which issue do you mean specifically?

so w/o using the ban list are the asshole nodes still effective?

effective at what? logging IP addresses? yes, but that is not something that can be detected in any automatic way

the problem is they constantly change their behavior, any specific mitigation we add quickly become useless

wasnt it that they werent routing traffic?

Thank you selsta

they are dropping transactions, yes

but that is also difficult to detect

them dropping transactions is find with Dandelion++, it was designed this way

is fine*

It's not centralized, you give it whatever list you want.

true, but everyone is giving it selstas list

And that is their choice, right ? Or would you want to override their choice to do so ?

You can maintain a list of your own and link it here if you want.

im not saying that at all. im just ignorant to how you can manually find them and add to ban list but not automate it.

There's no single way really. You just spot something odd, and check to see if anyone's being dishonest.

would automating node ban lists bring too many false positives?

kinghat[m]: automate in what way?

that is the exact problem, once we add detection they can simply change behavior to circumvent detection

how is a static ban list effective then?

because they can change behavior but changing IP address is more difficult

ah ok. figured it would be rather trivial to get around the ban list.

sure, the attacker can buy new IP addresses

anyone know the current chain size?

about 93GB and 32GB pruned

94GB

okay thanks

<agentpatience> Hi, I have a question I am using monero wallet GUI miner (linux package) and only get about half the hashrate that I get when I mine to a pool using xmrig. Can anyone help me get better performance?