Date   

Re: Recent Kiwi Problems at ON5KQ

hf_linkz
 

all KiwiSDR are currently under DoS attacks, that makes the kiwid crash and reboot, maybe related to your issues ?

check your /var/log/messages and add the ip sources from the very long AUTH-something lines in the ip blacklist until a fix from jks, tip: so far it comes from 34. and 35. which are machines hosted at google

Le mar. 21 déc. 2021 à 10:44, ON5KQ <ON5KQ@...> a écrit :
Recently I have a rather annoying problem with all my kiwis:
After a random time of working, suddenly the kiwi will loose internet connection so the screen (waterfall and spectrum) freezes and  the stats tab in the software shows audio overrun.
Nothing changed here in the installation at all...

I noticed this problem when running wsprdaemon on the kiwis, the freeze of the kiwi causes wsprdaemon to reconnect as soon as the kiwi is available again on the network...

All looked as if I have very short interruption of the internet (probably just msecs) so it causes the kiwi to freeze and not come back until you refresh the browser.
In wsprdaemon the reconnection is established automatically.

However it appears very often: in 15min approximately 3 times the kiwi freezes...

(I switched all timers off in the kiwi admin panel ....hi)

Of cause in wsprdaemon it means the spot performance is significant degraded - that's how I found out this strange behaviour.

What I did so far with no succes:
- complete reinstall of kiwisoftware (Vers 1.481)
- reboot of all related hardware (Router, switches, powersupplies)
- re-arrange network cabling and connect kiwi's directly to Internet without (routers, switches)
- change of browsers (Firefox, Edge, Opera...)
- change of powersupply

So far, nothing changed this faulty situation
It is not one kiwi, but all of them show this problem.

One more thing I found (it may be related to this problem, or it may not)

Usually, when you have free public channels available, the kiwi regularly reports the snr ratio to the website:
http://rx.linkfanel.net/snr.html

My kiwi's don't report the snr status, although activated to do that once per hour....
The data you can find on the website of my kiwi's is very old ... (weeks ago!)

Has anyone found similar problems before ?

Ulli, ON5KQ


Re: Recent Kiwi Problems at ON5KQ

ON5KQ
 

Does anyone know about a tool to monitor the internet connection. which would  detect internet outage in the msec range and gives me a report of such events ?
I am using Ubiquity EdgeMax router and haven't yet found out how to detect such WAN outages and document them with the routers own monitor software....

Ulli, ON5KQ


Recent Kiwi Problems at ON5KQ

ON5KQ
 

Recently I have a rather annoying problem with all my kiwis:
After a random time of working, suddenly the kiwi will loose internet connection so the screen (waterfall and spectrum) freezes and  the stats tab in the software shows audio overrun.
Nothing changed here in the installation at all...

I noticed this problem when running wsprdaemon on the kiwis, the freeze of the kiwi causes wsprdaemon to reconnect as soon as the kiwi is available again on the network...

All looked as if I have very short interruption of the internet (probably just msecs) so it causes the kiwi to freeze and not come back until you refresh the browser.
In wsprdaemon the reconnection is established automatically.

However it appears very often: in 15min approximately 3 times the kiwi freezes...

(I switched all timers off in the kiwi admin panel ....hi)

Of cause in wsprdaemon it means the spot performance is significant degraded - that's how I found out this strange behaviour.

What I did so far with no succes:
- complete reinstall of kiwisoftware (Vers 1.481)
- reboot of all related hardware (Router, switches, powersupplies)
- re-arrange network cabling and connect kiwi's directly to Internet without (routers, switches)
- change of browsers (Firefox, Edge, Opera...)
- change of powersupply

So far, nothing changed this faulty situation
It is not one kiwi, but all of them show this problem.

One more thing I found (it may be related to this problem, or it may not)

Usually, when you have free public channels available, the kiwi regularly reports the snr ratio to the website:
http://rx.linkfanel.net/snr.html

My kiwi's don't report the snr status, although activated to do that once per hour....
The data you can find on the website of my kiwi's is very old ... (weeks ago!)

Has anyone found similar problems before ?

Ulli, ON5KQ


Re: Kiwi Forum status?

Phil Karn
 

I'm trying an experiment. Last night I changed the port number of the KiwiSDR. That change has propagated through to the list on http://kiwisdr.com/public. I configured my router to return "administratively prohibited" ICMP messages to attempts to access the old port. And I cleared the blocking list, i.e., every IP address is allowed to access the new port number.

There is as yet no abusive traffic to the new port, but a steady stream of abusive traffic to the old port continues. I just counted 1,183 attempts (TCP syn packets) in a single minute, from the same addresses as before. There are 33 distinct IP addresses. Most are from several well-defined groups of /24 subnets in just a few /16 blocks: 45.43/16, 152.32/16 (the biggie), 128.14/16, 128.1/16, and 107.150/16. These are probably VPN endpoints, but I don't have an easy way to tell -- does anybody know of a good database?

This confirms my hunch that someone set up a rather elaborate bot but isn't watching it very closely. I'm watching to see how long it takes for them to switch to the new port number, or give up and try an entirely different KiwiSDR.


Re: Kiwi Forum status?

Phil Karn
 

I'm seeing groups of related IP addresses from places like Sao Paulo, Moscow, Los Angeles and Beijing. The users all claim to be in Piscataway, NJ. The connections are coordinated, persistent and annoying, and I'm not sure exactly what they're trying to do. I wouldn't mind so much if it just hogged one channel, but it's trying to hog all four which it can apparently do even when only one is actually tuned to a frequency. I.e., four TCP connections appear with background traffic on each one, but only one seems to be carrying actual receiver channel data, and only one shows up in the user list. But no new users can log in. I could impose a tighter time limit, but they already disconnect and reconnect every 15 minutes or so.

I'm reserving one channel for use with a password. But I really want to make my KiwiSDRs openly available so I hesitate to get even more restrictive.

And I'm still wondering why they're so interested in just one of the three KiwiSDRs I run. All three are in the directory. This one is different in that it uses a non-standard port number (8873) because of the IP port forwarding needed to reach it but I don't see how that could be relevant.


Re: Kiwi Forum status?

Jim Lill
 

Not likely as the apache part of things still runs

On 12/19/21 11:22 AM, Bruce KX4AZ wrote:

On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 05:53 AM, Glenn Elmore wrote:
Does anyone on this group have any knowledge of the status of the KiwiSDR forum?  It has been read-only for quite some time.
Is there any insight as to the reason or if/when it might return? 
With all of the KiwiSDRs involved with wsprdraemon and the database(s) this is becoming a matter of concern to me.  
Glenn n6gn
Wondering if it is related to the Apache server log4shell vulnerability that has been causing so much alarm recently.


Re: Kiwi Forum status?

Bruce KX4AZ
 

On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 05:53 AM, Glenn Elmore wrote:
Does anyone on this group have any knowledge of the status of the KiwiSDR forum?  It has been read-only for quite some time.
Is there any insight as to the reason or if/when it might return? 
With all of the KiwiSDRs involved with wsprdraemon and the database(s) this is becoming a matter of concern to me.  
Glenn n6gn
Wondering if it is related to the Apache server log4shell vulnerability that has been causing so much alarm recently.


Re: Kiwi Forum status?

Rob Robinett
 

I found some rather persistent bots in Maui, KPh and KFS but was able to suppress them by adding their public IP address/16 to the Kiw's block nets table.

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 6:39 PM WA2TP <myis300@...> wrote:
I have had a specific kiwi targeted and channels kicked repeatedly. To the point where I moved the antenna connected to the targeted kiwi, to a new kiwi and left that kiwi as a target, which continued to experience the same attacks. 

On Dec 18, 2021, at 10:38 PM, Phil Karn <karn@...> wrote:

I would also like to know the answer to this question. I'm seeing traffic to one of my KiwiSDRs that may or may not be an attack trying to exploit a bug, and I would really like to know if anyone else is seeing the same thing.
Phil



--
Rob Robinett
AI6VN
mobile: +1 650 218 8896


Re: Kiwi Forum status?

WA2TP - Tom
 

I have had a specific kiwi targeted and channels kicked repeatedly. To the point where I moved the antenna connected to the targeted kiwi, to a new kiwi and left that kiwi as a target, which continued to experience the same attacks. 

On Dec 18, 2021, at 10:38 PM, Phil Karn <karn@...> wrote:

I would also like to know the answer to this question. I'm seeing traffic to one of my KiwiSDRs that may or may not be an attack trying to exploit a bug, and I would really like to know if anyone else is seeing the same thing.
Phil


Re: Kiwi Forum status?

Phil Karn
 

I would also like to know the answer to this question. I'm seeing traffic to one of my KiwiSDRs that may or may not be an attack trying to exploit a bug, and I would really like to know if anyone else is seeing the same thing.
Phil


Kiwi Forum status?

Glenn Elmore
 

Does anyone on this group have any knowledge of the status of the KiwiSDR forum?  It has been read-only for quite some time.
Is there any insight as to the reason or if/when it might return? 
With all of the KiwiSDRs involved with wsprdraemon and the database(s) this is becoming a matter of concern to me.  
Glenn n6gn


Re: WD will not install on the new Raspberry Pi 'bullseye' OS release

Jim Lill
 


Many (most?) people who run WD on SBC do it headless I think.  

On 12/15/21 1:03 PM, Rolf Ekstrand wrote:

Greetings y'all

Just to get a peek on Bullseye I installed it on my raspi 400.  There are a number of other of programs than WSJT-X  tried that simply will not install direct yet from a .deb file as they need additional files and/or functions that obviously were removed from Bullseye.  The worst problem I have found (at least on my 400) is the video flicker when using Chrome and clicking on saved web links. It is very annoying.  As far as I goes Buster is still the way to go for now.

73 Rolf K9DZT
 
 


Re: WD will not install on the new Raspberry Pi 'bullseye' OS release

Rolf Ekstrand
 

Greetings y'all

Just to get a peek on Bullseye I installed it on my raspi 400.  There are a number of other of programs than WSJT-X  tried that simply will not install direct yet from a .deb file as they need additional files and/or functions that obviously were removed from Bullseye.  The worst problem I have found (at least on my 400) is the video flicker when using Chrome and clicking on saved web links. It is very annoying.  As far as I goes Buster is still the way to go for now.

73 Rolf K9DZT
 
 


Re: Noise

Glenn Elmore
 

Probably still several layers to peel away here.  A quick look brings more questions.

As mentioned, terminated coax noise floor doesn't tell us much.

But Dec 12 v 13 heat map is very suspicious. 

        Noise actually drops on 60 & 630 bands from Dec 12 to Dec 13.  !!  uhhh.. Really?  It would seem to imply two mechanisms with some cancellation on the 13th. Yccch.

Sharp steps from the 13th on at least 12-20 are a Bad Thing©. Propagated noise doesn't do this. More fodder for the local ingress theory. Compare your shape over a day with a known quiet site/system, perhaps KPH.

Is the T1-1 the very closest thing to the Kiwi?  It should be or you risk providing a return path through a chassis/common of the filters to something. You don't want this, you want to float that end of the Kiwi to CM currents.

Amplifiers in the right place can provide relative suppression of ingress, in the wrong place they don't help. Until you have peeled away the, apparently, multiple mechanisms it is hard to even say where to put one the closer to what you consider to be the antenna is generally better.

I don't know what ou mean by 'only used as a probe'. Is that just saying this is not a main stream rx for you?  I didn't get the relevance nor the inclusion of selected bands (at least two of which are suspicious as described above).

More peeling required.

On 12/14/21 5:19 PM, John via groups.io wrote:

Glenn, Clint,
At https://wspr.live/gui/d/ereVvgn7z/station-noise-stats?orgId=1&refresh=1m&var-site=TI4JWC&var-receiver=All&var-band=All&var-type=rms_level
you will find my noise raspberryIKWI recordings. Dec-11 is 50-ohm termination at the KIWI. Dec-12 levels with a 50-Ohm termination at the cable at the base of the antenna.
Dec-13 and on are when running normally. The antenna is only used as a probe at 60M, 180, 630.
The noise levels Radio-only .vs. radio-feed-line range from a low of 2 db for 17, 20 M  to 23 db for 80 M
From the antenna to KIWI, in the shack I have in series T1-T transformer, AM filter, FM-filter.
I have recommended 14 db amplifier on the bench but I need a "limited Attenuation High pass filter"
Unfortunately, with only one good eye, my construction days are passed. 

John


Re: Noise

John
 

Glenn, Clint,
At https://wspr.live/gui/d/ereVvgn7z/station-noise-stats?orgId=1&refresh=1m&var-site=TI4JWC&var-receiver=All&var-band=All&var-type=rms_level
you will find my noise raspberryIKWI recordings. Dec-11 is 50-ohm termination at the KIWI. Dec-12 levels with a 50-Ohm termination at the cable at the base of the antenna.
Dec-13 and on are when running normally. The antenna is only used as a probe at 60M, 180, 630.
The noise levels Radio-only .vs. radio-feed-line range from a low of 2 db for 17, 20 M  to 23 db for 80 M
From the antenna to KIWI, in the shack I have in series T1-T transformer, AM filter, FM-filter.
I have recommended 14 db amplifier on the bench but I need a "limited Attenuation High pass filter"
Unfortunately, with only one good eye, my construction days are passed. 

John


Re: Noise

Glenn Elmore
 

Not what you really want to know. A monopole uses the 'ground system' as an image plane. Even with a good radial system and the best baluns it is probably not possible to suitably distinguish CM from differential+CM noise.

A termination only tells you that current on the coax with no 'sink' at the antenna is low enough. It usuallly is but if you can't terminate and see the Kiwi noise floor then you do have a problem to fix somewhere, possibly CM through the groundplane of the kiwi in/out the LAN/SMA or PS/SMA. Anything that keeps you from a 50-ohm Kiwi noise floor needs to to be fixed first so go ahead and try it just don't think that you are nearly done...


On 12/9/21 9:44 AM, John via groups.io wrote:

Glenn,
The antenna is a Hy-Gain AV-680, 9-BAND HF VERT ANT, 80/40/30/20/17/15/12/10/6M. I am guessing that the"shorting method" does not apply. 
Can I learn anything by disconnecting at the antenna feed point and applying a short or 50-ohn load?

John


Re: Noise

John
 

Glenn,
The antenna is a Hy-Gain AV-680, 9-BAND HF VERT ANT, 80/40/30/20/17/15/12/10/6M. I am guessing that the"shorting method" does not apply. 
Can I learn anything by disconnecting at the antenna feed point and applying a short or 50-ohn load?

John


Re: incorrect values of snr difference on wspr.live grafana page ? Possible bug-report

ON5KQ
 

Hi Arne,
excellent - I realized, that you are already working on implement a map with real SNR difference numbers!

However we must be careful, when calculating!
A special case, which makes problems:
- What if first receiver don't hear a station at all and the reference receiver's mean receive SNR of that station is -20dbm.
In that case there should be no difference calculated, because the 'difference' then is 100%....hi

However if we follow the calculation as it is implemented now, we get a lot of false reports - let's take the example of above
receiver 1 don't hear the station at all.....---> Does it mean this field is 0  (zero?!)
Then reference receiver hears this station with -20dbm  --->   0dbm minus (-20dBm) = +20dBm

So:  An orange point is shown and receiver 1 as if the receiver 1 would hear the station 20db better - instead it don't hear it at all !

We can indeed see lots of high numbers - when we compare totally different  receive locations, where the chance is high, that one station don't hear the same stations as the reference receiver... could you check it please ?!

But this map will be great, once you have found the time for some tuning.... (as with the case mentioned above)

Many thanks for the great work !

Ulli, ON5KQ


Re: Probability theory - spot yield for hopping versus continuous reception?

WA2TP - Tom
 

It’s fairly simple. I am by no means any kind of debian expert. 

In fact, my very first experience with debian was a year and a half ago. 

Since then I have built well over a dozen kiwi/BBAI systems for fellow hams. 

The most difficult part was a reliable thermal solution which I was able design.

Feel free to reach out if I can be of any  assistance. 

On Dec 5, 2021, at 4:14 PM, Bruce KX4AZ <bruce@...> wrote:

Setting up a BBAI would definitely be the best solution for me if I don't eventually add a second Kiwi, but I have the impression that would require a fair amount of effort software-wise that exceeds my current skill set -  i.e. I had just enough to get wsprdaemon running on a Pi4.  Perhaps I should do is make it my summer 2022 project, when I return to the KX4AZ/T site where the KiwiSDR is running.

Generally speaking, my goal has been to maximize the unique station counts in a 24 hour period, without tying up the KiwiSDR too much.  When I occasionally run a supplementary hopper receiver, I adjust the bands based on the time of day, to focus on what makes the most sense, i.e. at night I don't bother with 15/12/10 meters, but 630/160m are worth including.  

This thread actually belongs in the wsprbeacon forum, it occurs to me.  My interest/curiosity is in devising a mathematical algorithm to predict how many unique stations might be missed on a specific band, if a receiver is only listening for x% of the time over the course of a 24 hour period.  Essentially it becomes a cumulative probability of spotting, taking into account the the proportion of the day that the beacons are transmitting, combined with the probability that the receiver will "see" a signal of adequate S/N ratio.  My sense is that a 20% duty cycle on a single band would yield much more than 20% of the total in comparison to a continuous (100%) receiving mode.  The question is what that % value might be.  And actually, this value could be extracted from the WSPR data base if one could interrogate it in the correct way, and see how many unique spots remain if 80% of them were randomly removed from entire set of raw spots in a day.  So I should be able to answer my original question once I improve my WSPR database skills. 


Re: Probability theory - spot yield for hopping versus continuous reception?

Bruce KX4AZ
 

Setting up a BBAI would definitely be the best solution for me if I don't eventually add a second Kiwi, but I have the impression that would require a fair amount of effort software-wise that exceeds my current skill set -  i.e. I had just enough to get wsprdaemon running on a Pi4.  Perhaps I should do is make it my summer 2022 project, when I return to the KX4AZ/T site where the KiwiSDR is running.

Generally speaking, my goal has been to maximize the unique station counts in a 24 hour period, without tying up the KiwiSDR too much.  When I occasionally run a supplementary hopper receiver, I adjust the bands based on the time of day, to focus on what makes the most sense, i.e. at night I don't bother with 15/12/10 meters, but 630/160m are worth including.  

This thread actually belongs in the wsprbeacon forum, it occurs to me.  My interest/curiosity is in devising a mathematical algorithm to predict how many unique stations might be missed on a specific band, if a receiver is only listening for x% of the time over the course of a 24 hour period.  Essentially it becomes a cumulative probability of spotting, taking into account the the proportion of the day that the beacons are transmitting, combined with the probability that the receiver will "see" a signal of adequate S/N ratio.  My sense is that a 20% duty cycle on a single band would yield much more than 20% of the total in comparison to a continuous (100%) receiving mode.  The question is what that % value might be.  And actually, this value could be extracted from the WSPR data base if one could interrogate it in the correct way, and see how many unique spots remain if 80% of them were randomly removed from entire set of raw spots in a day.  So I should be able to answer my original question once I improve my WSPR database skills.