July 2018 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays
by delber 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 05:14:44PM -0400, Andrew Lewis wrote: > $100 is not going to cut it most likely, even for only 100 mbit > traffic only. Most providers are really antsy about spam/DMCA reports, > and aren't willing to deal with it for that cheap. I'd suspect that > you are looking at the $150-$200+ range, at least in my experience. We are a small group of people trying to setup something like torservers.net in France. We already made quite a bunch of contacts with a small amount of french ISP to ask them about hosting Tor exit relays. The list is long and we are not over yet. But here is what we know as today. We already have ruled out the three major cheap hosting providers: OVH, Gandi and Dedibox. All of them are listed as bad ISPs on GoodBadISPs as prohibiting relays in their ToS. What is fun is that exit nodes running on their french IPs still account for 2.3353% of total P_exit (out of 2.6573% for all french exit nodes). We have approached some other big commercial ISPs. It was not a formal inquiry, but they did not look very happy at the idea of hosting exit nodes. What we have found though, is that several smaller (not-for-profits or coops) ISPs would be happy to help the Tor network, provided there is a clear legal boundary. Something that our not-for-profit would create. The downside is that they are small, so the cost of their bandwidth is between a monthly 3b, and 10b, (when it is not even more) for each Mbps (95%ile). But they would stand in case of trouble. And some of them have an economic interest as using more bandwidth would lower their overall cost per Mbps. One of them is willing to sponsor some of the bandwidth, and it looks like a good place to start an initial set of nodes. But even with their sponsoring, $100/month will not cover hosting+bandwidth expenses. It might be something desirable though. If external funding does not cover all the costs, then we will have to campaign for other donations. A good habit, as it makes it more likely that at least some of the nodes would survive in case the external funding stops. -- delber _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

Re: [ZS] Re: [FoRK] Reminder: ZSF launch event tomorrow! Please help spread the word if you can!
by Bryce Lynch 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Dirk Bruere <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: > It is an argument that the US govt already has the power to define the > creation of BC as a crime > That would be contingent upon whether or not anybody above a particular pay grade has ever heard of it, understands it, or has someone tell them that it could be a bad thing. There isn't a unified front on Bitcoin in government right now; probably a few geeks they have as contractors know of it but they're not talking about it on site. That said, cryptocurrency's been tried in the past, and it was the lack of chargebacks (which banks make obscene amounts off of) rather than the legality which killed it. -- The Doctor [412/724/301/703] [ZS (MED)] https://drwho.virtadpt.net/ "I am everywhere." -- -- Zero State mailing list: http://groups.google.com/group/DoctrineZero ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

RE: Cypherpunks IQ Test
by Aimee Farr 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

Mike: Are you often the victim of mercenary females? > -----Original Message----- > From: mmotyka(a)lsil.com [mailto:mmotyka@lsil.com] > Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 3:28 PM > To: aimee.farr(a)pobox.com > Subject: Cypherpunks IQ Test > > > It's an obvious setup. The woods are part of a defense installation, > apple is filled with coke, the girl is underage, the woods are full of > trigger happy fibbies. > > You hit the ground and roll into the brush, drawing on the way. You > attempt to locate opponents and identify the safest route away from the > situation. > > Mike > > > >CYPHERPUNKS IQ TEST > > > >QUESTION #1. > > > >You are walking through the woods alone. A beautiful unclothed woman > >magically appears in front of you. She holds out an apple. > > > >1. Please darken in the correct choice using a Number Two pencil: > > > >(a) you bite the apple. > >(b) you take the woman. > >(c) you run away. > >(d) a and b, but not c. > >(e) b and c only. > >(f) all of the above. > >(g) none of the above. > > > >2. Please justify your answer: > > > > > >___________________________________________________________________. > > > > > >Just curious.... > > > > -Aimee

2 1

Re: Megaupload.com seized
by Jacob Taylor 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 11:14 +0000, Alec Muffett wrote: > On 20 Jan 2012, at 11:00, Tei wrote: > > > Fileshares can organize thenselves in sites based on a forum software > > that is private by default (open with registration), then share some > > "information" file that include the url to the files hosted, and the > > key to unencrypt these files, and some metadata. A special desktop > > program* would load that information file, and start the http > > download. > > > At the risk of kicking over old ground, there are a bunch of privacy solutions like this; possibly the most complete attempt (in terms of attempted privacy and distribution) is Freenet: > > http://freenetproject.org/whatis.html > > ...but it's slow; then there's Tahoe-LAFS - a decentralised filesystem: > > https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs > > ...but it's slow; then there are connection anonymisation tools like I2P and Tor, but - wonderful as they are - they're slow. > > Can you see a pattern developing that would be relevant to the downloader of 700Mb+ AVIs? :-) > > It would be great to speed them through wider adoption, but until then... > > -a Tahoe-lafs can be fast. A grid I help out with is often capable of 600kilobyte/per/second downloads (or faster), and I personally have several files stored on there in excess of 500mb. Close enough to your 700mb movie example. I use this storage as a CDN of sorts, as a friend wrote an HTTP interface to the Tahoe-lafs grid. Should you wish to see it in action, the code and download links are over here --> http://cryto.net/projects/tahoe.html ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

Re: Megaupload.com seized
by Jacob Taylor 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 11:14 +0000, Alec Muffett wrote: > On 20 Jan 2012, at 11:00, Tei wrote: > > > Fileshares can organize thenselves in sites based on a forum software > > that is private by default (open with registration), then share some > > "information" file that include the url to the files hosted, and the > > key to unencrypt these files, and some metadata. A special desktop > > program* would load that information file, and start the http > > download. > > > At the risk of kicking over old ground, there are a bunch of privacy solutions like this; possibly the most complete attempt (in terms of attempted privacy and distribution) is Freenet: > > http://freenetproject.org/whatis.html > > ...but it's slow; then there's Tahoe-LAFS - a decentralised filesystem: > > https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs > > ...but it's slow; then there are connection anonymisation tools like I2P and Tor, but - wonderful as they are - they're slow. > > Can you see a pattern developing that would be relevant to the downloader of 700Mb+ AVIs? :-) > > It would be great to speed them through wider adoption, but until then... > > -a Tahoe-lafs can be fast. A grid I help out with is often capable of 600kilobyte/per/second downloads (or faster), and I personally have several files stored on there in excess of 500mb. Close enough to your 700mb movie example. I use this storage as a CDN of sorts, as a friend wrote an HTTP interface to the Tahoe-lafs grid. Should you wish to see it in action, the code and download links are over here --> http://cryto.net/projects/tahoe.html ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

[i2p] weekly status notes [jan 11]
by jrandom 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi y'all, time for the weekly update * Index 1) Net status 2) 0.5 progress 3) 0.6 status 4) azneti2p 5) fbsd 6) hosts.txt as WoT 7) ??? * 1) Net status Overall the net is handling itself well, though we had some problems with one of the irc servers being offline and my outproxy acting up. However, the other irc server was (and still is) around (though at the moment doesn't have CTCP disabled - see [1]), so we were able to satiate our need for irc :) [1] http://ugha.i2p/HowTo/IrcAnonymityGuide * 2) 0.5 progress There's progress, ever onwards! Ok, I suppose I should get into a little more detail than that. I've finally got the new tunnel routing crypto implemented and tested (yay!), but during some discussions we found a place where there could be one level of anonymity leak, so its being revised (the first hop would have known they were the first hop, which is Bad. but really really easy to fix). Anyway, I hope to get the docs and code on that updated and posted soon, and docs on the rest of the 0.5 tunnel operation / pooling / etc posted later. More news when there's more news. * 3) 0.6 status (what!?) Mule has begun investigations into the UDP transport, and we've been mining zab for his experiences with limewire's UDP code. Its all very promising, but much work to be done (and still several months out on the roadmap [2]). Got some inspiration or suggestions? Get involved and help focus it towards what needs to be done! [2] http://www.i2p.net/roadmap#0.6 * 4) azneti2p I almost wet my pants when I got the info, but it looks like the folks at azureus have written up an I2P plugin, allowing both anonymous tracker usage and anonymous data comm! Multiple torrents work within a single I2P destination too, and it uses the I2PSocket directly, allowing tight integration with the streaming lib. The azneti2p plugin is still in the early stages with this 0.1 release, and there are lots of optimizations and ease of use improvements coming down the pipe, but if you're up for getting your hands dirty, swing by i2p-bt on the i2p irc networks and get in on the fun :) For the adventurus types, get the latest azureus [3], check their i2p howto [4], and snag the plugin [5]. [3] http://azureus.sourceforge.net/index_CVS.php [4] http://azureus.sourceforge.net/doc/AnonBT/i2p/I2P_howto.htm [5] http://azureus.sourceforge.net/plugin_details.php?plugin=azneti2p duck has been taking heroic measures to keep compatability with i2p-bt, and there is frantic hacking in #i2p-bt as I type this, so keep an eye out for a new i2p-bt release Real Soon Now. * 5) fbsd Thanks to the work of lioux, there's now a freebsd ports entry for i2p [6]. While we aren't really looking to have lots of distro-specific installs out there, he promises to keep it updated when we give sufficient notice for new release. This should be helpful for fbsd-current folks - thanks lioux! [6] http://www.freshports.org/net/i2p/ * 6) hosts.txt as WoT Now that the 0.4.2.6 release has bundled in Ragnarok's addressbook, the process of keeping your hosts.txt populated with new entries is in every user's control. Not only that, but you can view the addressbook subscriptions as a poor-man's web of trust - you import new entries from a site you trust to introduce you to new destinations (defaults being dev.i2p and duck.i2p). With this capacity comes a whole new dimension - the ability for people to choose what sites to essentially link to in their hosts.txt and which ones not to. While there is a place for the public free-for-all that has occurred in the past, now that the naming system is not just in theory but in practice fully distributed, people will need to figure out their own policies on publishing other people's destinations. The important part behind the scenes here is that this is a learning opportunity for the I2P community. Before, both gott and I were trying to help push the naming issue by publishing gott's site as jrandom.i2p (he asked for that site first - I did not, and have no control whatsoever as to the contents of that URL). Now we may begin to explore how we are going to deal with sites not listed in the http://dev.i2p.net/i2p/hosts.txt or on forum.i2p. Not being posted on those locations doesn't prevent in any way a site from operating - your hosts.txt is just your local address book. Anyway, enough babbling, I just wanted to put people on notice so we can all see what is to be done. * 7) ??? Yowza, thats a lot of stuff. Busy week, and I don't forsee things slowing down anytime soon. So, swing on by the meeting in a few minutes and we can talk about stuff. =jr -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFB5D2EGnFL2th344YRAoMnAJsHxgRyB3eydlqKiCy54CYzRCEbsQCfRWV0 ItUMfG4sTnmRKk5m2u9Yxjg= =cJJx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ i2p mailing list i2p(a)i2p.net http://i2p.dnsalias.net/mailman/listinfo/i2p ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]

1 0

Re: hardware acceleration available for Tor ? On FreeBSD ?
by coderman 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:24 PM, John Case <case(a)sdf.lonestar.org> wrote: > ... > You discuss the performance benefits of using the AES CTR in hardware below, > but before I get to that, I wonder if you experienced the same as what is > quoted just above: that the real CPU load occurs during "the asymmetric-key > processing (i.e., onion-skin encrypting/decrypting)" and that that is the > only area where we can attempt to speed things up with hardware ? speeding up OpenSSL derived CTR mode with hardware acceleration is useful. (the HardwareAccel and EngineName options above) speeding up Tor with native hardware acceleration and chained / repetitive CTR offload is a much bigger win. as an example the VIA Padlock engine can do a few score MBytes/sec aes 128 with small/single block sizes like those used when HardwareAccel is on and EngineName padlock set. if you could utilize the maximum 16KByte rep instruction mode directly goes well over a gigabyte / second. this is also why the native Solaris API CTR mode gives much better performance than the OpenSSL engine acceleration. speeding up OpenSSL pubkey ops also helps. as of OpenSSL 0.9.9 and 1.0.x you can build OpenSSL with padlock MONTMULT acceleration. still no dynamic engine support for pubkey ops iirc... > So, if I understand correctly, the HardwareAccel option can be turned on by > anyone, regardless of OS or hardware platform. It will then (probably) just > do AES CTR with OpenSSL (since most people use OpenSSL) and just get no > benefit because OpenSSL won't do AES CTR through hardware. there will be some benefit as Tor wraps a CTR mode around (accelerated) OpenSSL ECB mode. the problem is that this method is limited to single blocks per call, rather than long buffers optimized for crypto offload. you may also get SHA acceleration. the notices log should say, for example: [info] crypto_global_init(): Initializing OpenSSL engine support. [info] crypto_global_init(): Initializing dynamic OpenSSL engine "padlock" acceleration support. [info] crypto_global_init(): Loaded dynamic OpenSSL engine "padlock". [info] crypto_global_init(): Loaded OpenSSL hardware acceleration engine, setting default ciphers. [info] Using default implementation for RSA [info] Using default implementation for DH [info] Using default implementation for RAND [notice] Using OpenSSL engine VIA PadLock: RNG (not used) ACE2 PHE(8192) PMM [padlock] for SHA1 [info] Using default implementation for 3DES [notice] Using OpenSSL engine VIA PadLock: RNG (not used) ACE2 PHE(8192) PMM [padlock] for AES > So, even if I got a BCM5825 working with with the ubsec driver on FreeBSD, > and used HardwareAccel, it would just be wasted with OpenSSL. not necessarily, per above :) > On the other hand, there are Solaris-specific routines (crypto framework > APIs (PKCS#11)) built into Solaris that Tor can call instead of OpenSSL, > which _will_ do AES CTR in hardware, yielding a huge gain in performance > (you mention 25x). > > Do I have all of that correct ? it would also be nice to have these routines native for other engines, like padlock. however this is not a small amount of effort and no one with time and skill has shown an interest yet. (Tor buffer allocation alignment to 16K, inline padlock instr. calls in REP mode, and other changes required.) > - Are there analogues to the "crypto framework APIs (PKCS#11)" in other OS's > ? What is this layer called for Linux, for instance ? there are kernel cryptographic facilities including asm optimized and hardware accelerated crypto primitives. these are usually not utilized from userspace directly. there are PKCS specs for communicating with offload devices in a concise manner, and libs of various types to speak this to myraid hardware. perhaps a longer discussion should be taken off list... > - How does the T2 (Niagara 2) compare to dedicated hardware such as the Sun > Crypto 6000 which is currently available ? the T2 is core acceleration and thus higher throughput for most purposes. the 6000 is useful as a hardened private key store service for your less trusted OS and software to cooperate with. > - Am I correct that if a new version of OpenSSL appeared with AES CTR > hardware support, an end user could just proceed blindly with card > insertion, driver install, add HardwareAccel=1, and poof! Yes ? Tor would need to be updated to take advantage of the new CTR mode in the OpenSSL API calls, but then the same HardwareAccel (and AccelName) options would provide a significant improvement over the previous acceleration mode. best regards, *********************************************************************** To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo(a)torproject.org with unsubscribe or-talk in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/ ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

EDRI-gram newsletter - Number 5.9, 9 May 2007
by EDRI-gram newsletter 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

============================================================ EDRI-gram biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe Number 5.9, 9 May 2007 ============================================================ Contents ============================================================ 1. European Commission supports Privacy Enhancing Technologies 2. EDPS advises against new data protection framework decision 3. PNR deal ratification postponed by the Czech Senate 4. RapidShare sues German rights holder association 5. The EDPS Annual Report for 2006 shows more concern for data protection 6. Failure of the Scottish e-voting system 7. First draft on data retention law in Romania 8. New calls for computer online searches by German authorities 9. Recommended Action 10. Agenda 11. About ============================================================ 1. European Commission supports Privacy Enhancing Technologies ============================================================ Commissioner Franco Frattini, who is responsible for the legislation concerning co-operation between European police as well as data protection of European police, has shown public support for privacy enhancing technologies (PETs). Frattini's position is surprising taking into consideration its open support for other privacy-invasive projects such as the data retention directive, EU-US PNR agreement or the planned EU fingerprint database. A public statement published by the European Commission (EC) on 2 May 2007 directly supports PETs, expecting them to improve the protection of privacy as well as help fulfil the data protection rules. "The use of PETs would be complementary to the existing legal framework and enforcement mechanisms. In fact the intervention of different actors in the data processing and the existence of the different national jurisdictions involved could make enforcement of the legal framework difficult." The PETs mentioned in the Commission's communication are: the automatic anonymisation after a certain lapse of time, encryption tools, cookie-cutters or the Platform for Privacy Preferences (P3P). These PETs could ensure that "breaches of the data protection rules and violations of individual's rights are not only something forbidden...but also technically more difficult". The communication shows the plans of the EC in this field through activities such as identifying the need and technological requirements of PETs, promoting use of PETs by the industry, ensuring respect for appropriate standards in the protection of personal data through PETs and promoting the use of PETs by public authorities. It also aims at direct support by funding research on PETs: Europe contributed over 18 million Euro to PET research as part of its 6th Framework Programme (2002-06), and this is expected to increase significantly in the coming years. Frattini also advanced the idea of a pan-European system of "privacy seals" that will help the consumers. Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETs) (2.05.2007) http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/07/159&format=… Euro Data watchdog warns of database creep (3.05.2007) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/05/03/database_creep/ ============================================================ 2. EDPS advises against new data protection framework decision ============================================================ The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) has shown serious concerns in his opinion on the Commission's new Council Framework Decision proposal regarding the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters. Although appreciative of the German presidency's efforts, Peter Hustinx advised the Council against adopting the proposal considering it failed to provide appropriate data protection. EDPS believes that a Framework Decision on the protection of personal data in the third pillar is essential in the development of an area of freedom, security and justice and that "the growing importance of the police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters as well as the actions stemming from the Hague Programme have highlighted the necessity of common standards in the protection of personal data in the third pillar". At the same time, Hustinx underlines that some of the aspects of the proposal are not in agreement with the EU Treaty and some are even below the standards of the Council of Europe Convention 108 of 1981. "We need to ensure high standards to guarantee both the citizens rights and the efficiency in police and judicial cooperation. Unfortunately, this proposal does not meet the expectations" stated the EDPS. Two important issues Hustinx opposes to are the extension of the proposal scope to third pillar data processing by Europol and Eurojust and the creation of a new joint supervisory authority before including adequate protection measures for the citizens' data when such data are exchanged between member states and third parties. In his opinion, the lack of proper and broad level of data protection will make information exchanges "subject to different national "rules of origin" and "double standards" that strongly affect efficiency in law enforcement cooperation while not improving the protection of personal data". The EDPS considers some essential data protection provisions have been taken out from the previous text thus weakening the level of protection of citizens and also finds the legislative quality of the text as unsatisfactory. "Apart from the choice of legal instrument, several provisions do not fulfil the requirements of the common guidelines for the quality of drafting of Community legislation. In particular, the text is not drafted clearly, simply and precisely, which makes it difficult for the citizens to identify their rights and obligations unambiguously". Two of the aspects that are not properly covered by the proposal are the limitation of the further purposes for which personal data may be processed, and the lack of specific and strict conditions for the data exchanges with non-law enforcement authorities. The opinion shows there are no adequate provisions related to the quality of data. There are no provisions regarding the differentiation of data categories based on the accuracy degree and reliability, no distinction between data based on facts and data based on personal opinions or assessment. "The lack of such a common requirement could actually undermine the data being exchanged between police authorities as they will not be able to ascertain whether the data can be construed as "evidence", "fact", "hard intelligence" or "soft intelligence". This could have the consequence of not only hampering security operations and intelligence." The privacy watchdog especially objects to the way of handling the exchange of DNA data and urges on caution regarding the introduction of biometric data in passports. He remarked that, in the fight against crime, data protection adequate measures had very often been disregarded for the sake of security. Third pillar data protection: EDPS strongly advises Council not to adopt current proposal without significant improvements (30.04.07) http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/EDPS/… Third opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the Proposal for a Council Framework Decision on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters (27.04.2007) http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/Consu… EU Data Protection Supervisor warns against networking police databases (3.05.2007) http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/89219/ ============================================================ 3. PNR deal ratification postponed by the Czech Senate ============================================================ The ratification by the Czech Parliament of the proposed agreement between the European Union and the Unites States of America on the processing and transfer of passenger name record (PNR) data has been taken off the agenda based on the position of the Green Party MPs. On 23 April 2007, EDRI-member Iuridicum Remedium - Czech Republic sent a written appeal to the members of the Green Party parliamentary club, recommending them to vote against the ratification of the proposed agreement between the European Union and the Unites States of America on the processing and transfer of passenger name record (PNR) data for the following reasons: The scope of the agreement submitted for approval as parliamentary paper no. 162 by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Transport has been (in comparison with the former agreement repealed by the European Court of Justice) "widened substantially (more data requested, considerable weakening if not complete elimination of the purpose limitation, sharing with more and unspecified agencies and countries, undefined retention periods, allowing for more frequent and earlier pushing of data, no guarantees for a definitive switch to the PUSH system, the virtual abolition of the joint evaluation) whereas the protection of personal data of EU citizens and means of legal redress are at best unclear, and probably weaker than under the previous agreement." Further concerns were raised about the "precedent this agreement may set for future agreements with the US on PNR, or on other categories of data (such as bank account details as in the case of SWIFT, or records of telecommunications). The lack of democratic legitimacy regarding rules on the transfer of data must be remedied as a matter of urgency." Moreover, the Department of Homeland Security has been using PNR data in the system called the Automated Targeting System, which violates both EU and US data protection laws. It uses passenger personal data for "risk assessment scoring" and retains the data for up to 40 years. In January 2007, Privacy International and ACLU called for repeal of the EU-US agreement on data transfers on this basis. Decision on the Agreement between the EU and USA passenger name record postponed by the Czech Senate (only in Czech, 25.04.2007) http://www.iure.org/614715 EU original text of the PNR Agreement -submitted as parliamentary paper n.162 (27.10.2006) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2006/l_298/l_29820061027en00… EDRI-gram: Travellers privacy and European Union (30.07.2006) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.16/prague (Thanks to Marek Tichy - EDRI-member Iuridicum Remedium, Czech Republic) ============================================================ 4. RapidShare sues German rights holder association ============================================================ Rapidshare AG sued the German society for musical performing and mechanical reproduction rights (GEMA) in order to clarify the legal situation regarding free file hosting in Germany. The counter-attack from Rapidshare, a well-known free file hosting provider based in Switzerland, comes after the suit initiated in Germany by GEMA in January 2007 for distributing MP3 files on Rapidshare.com. GEMA won a preliminary injunction in the first lawsuit that was upheld by the appeal in March of the District Court of Cologne. The District Court in Cologne had considered that Rapidshare was liable for copyright infringements even if the works were uploaded by the users and not by the provider. As a result of the GEMA action, Rapidshare was forced to stop the distribution of works from the GEMA catalogue and to actively monitor uploads of these works. Rapidshare argues that this activity is close to impossible and is not covered by the German copyright law either. Rapidshare CEO Bobby Chang considers that people have the right to make backup copies of their music and that it is practically impossible to distinguish between legal and unauthorized uses of MP3s. "We are confident that it is possible to solve the conflict with GEMA while at the same time paying tribute to innovation" said Chang. Rapidshare sues rights holders (19.04.2007) http://www.p2p-blog.com/item-280.html RapidShare AG press release (only in German, 18.04.2007) http://www.blogspan.net/377-rapidshare-ag-klagt-gegen-gema-welche-prufungsp… EDRI-gram: Temporary injunction against RapidShare.de (31.01.2007) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.2/rapidshare ============================================================ 5. The EDPS Annual Report for 2006 shows more concern for data protection ============================================================ The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) has issued its report for 2006 that includes activities and events as well as the main trends of the past year and draws conclusions related to complaints, developments in security, justice, freedom and new technologies with possible impact on personal data protection. One of the conclusions of the report is that while the number of complaints has increased, it is still low and only 20% of the complaints made in 2006 were valid. "A large majority of the complaints received continued to fall outside of the supervisory competences of the EDPS, for instance because they dealt exclusively with processing of personal data on the level of the member states, where national Data Protection Authorities are competent," said the report. The report shows that data protection continues to be a significant challenge and more work is needed to make data protection rules and practices be implemented in the European laws and "to develop a data protection culture as part of good governance". It also states concern regarding the increasing tendency of authorities to establish central databases and large scale IT systems. According to EDPS, state databases continuously exceed their function, not always to the benefit of people and there is "the risk of illegitimate use" of these databases. "The EDPS has observed a trend in that once a database has been established, access to it is extended to more authorities, for other purposes than those for which it was set up." He believes that the cooperation between the police forces and the judiciary systems have been developed without a proper protection for the citizens' data protection rights. European Data Protection Supervisor - Annual Report 2006 - Executive Summary http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/EDPS/… European Data Protection Supervisor- Annual Report 2006 http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/EDPS/… Most complaints to EU privacy watchdog are misdirected (2.05.2007) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=8015 ============================================================ 6. Failure of the Scottish e-voting system ============================================================ The electronic voting system used in the Scottish Parliamentary Elections on 3 May 2007 went on as the security experts had worned and the Scotland Office announced an urgent investigation on the "serious technical failures" having delayed the announcement of results in several areas. Several counts were delayed and about 140 000 votes (approx. 7% of the total votes cast) may be discounted because of the problems that occurred with the new electronic counting system, used for the first time in Scotland. The independent Electoral Commission, set up by the Parliament to monitor elections, had previously advised against the system with different types of election used by the UK Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) in the elections for the local councils, the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh assembly. The experimental system included early voting in person up to two weeks in advance, internet voting, touch-phone telephone voting or e-counting as was the case for the Scottish Parliament. In spite of the testing in advance, problems with the automatic counting system occurred causing the suspension of the counting for some time. DRS Data Services, which supplied the electronic counting machines, stated to BBC that the delays had been caused by a "small issue" that their technical staff was doing efforts to solve. "The e-counting system has not crashed. This is a temporary interruption to one small aspect of the overall process," said the company spokeswomen. However, the system was described as a fiasco by the thirty experts from North America invited to witness the new electronic voting system. Robert Richie, executive director of US-based organisation Fair Vote, considered as "totally unacceptable to have so many votes spoiled" and stated: "We were also very concerned about the lack of uniform standards in judging what votes were rejected and which were deemed to be valid". The Electoral Commission will perform an extended statutory review into the election. The Scotland Office spokesman said: "It is important that they look as a matter of urgency into delays in postal ballots, the high number of spoiled ballot papers, and the performance of the electronic counting machines." E-voting policy review after Scottish ballot chaos (4.05.2007) http://www.electronicsweekly.com/Articles/2007/05/04/41323/E-voting+policy+… Inquiry launched into Scottish voting confusion (4.05.2007) http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKL0429559920070504 International experts slam ballot fiasco (6.05.2007) http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,2073641,00.html Security fear over internet voting (2.05.2007) http://technology.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2070296,00.html Vote early, vote often (1.05.2007) http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/david_hencke/2007/05/vote_early_vote_of… ============================================================ 7. First draft on data retention law in Romania ============================================================ A first draft law for the implementation of the data retention directive was presented at the end of April 2007 by the Romanian Ministry of Communications and Information Technology for public consultation. The ministry also organized on 26 April a public debate on the draft law. The first draft was achieved in cooperation with a number of public bodies including the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Internal Affairs or the Romanian Data Protection Authority. The text proposing a 12-month period of traffic data retention, without any explanatory reports, has received criticism from ISPs and other telecom operators that believe it puts a high financial burden on them. The draft clearly specifies that the content of the communications cannot be retained by the operators, considering the retention of the content as well as any retained data transfer without a proper judicial authorization as crimes. The retained data should be deleted at the end of the 12 month period. Only the electronic communication providers that have notified the Regulatory Authority are subject to data retention obligations and there are no provisions for the hosting or other online service providers. The retained data can be accessed by prosecutors only in the penal cases related to organized crime and terrorism crimes and with a proper specific judged-approved access authorization. The prosecutor can ask, through a specific ordinance, for access to the data as a provisional measure, if this is necessary due to specific circumstances that could otherwise put in danger the penal investigation. But in this case, the prosecutor's decision together with the data needs to be confirmed by a judge in 48 hours. If a judge does not confirm the prosecutor's ordinance, all the accessed data will be destroyed. The very detailed procedure regarding access by prosecutors to the retained data is in opposition with Article 16 of the draft text that allows, "in case of a threat to the national security", the request of the retained data by "the specific bodies, as explained in the laws on national security". The vagueness of this article was criticized in the public debate, the participants considering that this could leave room for discriminatory access by the Romanian secret services. As regards the type of data retained, the Romanian draft is only a translation of the European Directive on data retention. The public consultation will end on 10 May 2007 and the text could be approved by the Government and then sent to the Parliament for consideration. Draft law on data retention by public electronic communication providers (only in Romanian, 04.2007) http://www.mcti.ro/index.php?id=16&lege=383 MCIT Publicly Debates the Retention of Data Generated or Processed in Connection with the Provision of Publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks (26.04.2007) http://www.mcti.ro/index.php?id=28&lege=1257&L=1 EDRI - Member APTI - Romania - Opinion of the draft data retention law (only in Romanian, 9.05.2007) http://www.apti.ro/opinie_APTI_Legedatetrafic_9052007.pdf ============================================================ 8. New calls for computer online searches by German authorities ============================================================ The German authorities seem to have a higher desire to push for a legal basis of the online searches of personal computers in Germany, despite the Federal Supreme Court decision in February 2007 that, according to the German Code of Criminal Procedure, decided that online police snooping was illegal. Wolfgang Schduble, The German Federal Minister of the Interior, has asked again to adopt stricter security rules that are essential in the fight against terror. Schduble said that terrorists were beginning to set their sights on Germany and "These days the Internet is the place where terrorists from all over the world arrange to meet". This is why it is essential to make the online searches of computers a legal possibility for the German law enforcement. The online searches of computers by the secret services have been a reality in Germany since 2005, following an order to do so by then-Interior Minister Otto Schily. The statement was admitted by the Chancellor's Office that did not reveal the number of searches. The German Government stated that it did not see any breach of the privacy of telecommunications in these actions. Gisela Piltz, spokesperson for home affairs from the FDP in the Bundestag, who forced the government to admit the searches, said that "the cat is out of the bag". The Social Democratic Party has accused Mr. Schduble of engaging in a "hypocritical debate" and the new approach is like "a recipe for asking for trouble". The German Supreme Court president, Hans-J|rgen Papier, told the Frankfurt Press Club that the politicians were going too far in asking for greater security and they were forgetting that the state is also obliged of ensuring civil rights. Minister of the Interior renews call for legal online PC search option (4.05.2007) http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/89294 German government admits it is already conducting online searches (26.04.2007) http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/88895 EDRI-gram: Online police searches found illegal in Germany (14.02.2007) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.3/online-searches EDRI-gram: Proposal of computers online searching in Germany (20.12.2006) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.24/computer-online-searching ============================================================ 9. Recommended Action ============================================================ Public consultation on the Regulation regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (Regulation 1049/2001). http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/07/511&format=HT… http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/revision/index_en.htm For Dutch readers - Petition for more flexible contracts for members of the rights collecting society which allow them to choose the conditions under which to release their own music and use CC licenses. http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/bumawakeup/ ============================================================ 10. Agenda ============================================================ 15-16 May 2007, Brussels, Belgium The European Patent Conference - EUROPACO-2 http://www.eupaco.org/eupaco2 18 May 2007, Oxford, UK Global Internet Filtering Conference 2007 The OpenNet Initiative is holding its first public conference to discuss the current state of play of Internet filtering worldwide. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/oniconference07/Main_Page 18-19 May 2007, Brasov, Romania eLiberatica - The Benefits of Open and Free Technologies - Romanian IT Open Source and Free Software Conference http://www.eliberatica.ro/ 26 May 2007, Zurich, Switzerland Creative Commons Switzerland - Launch Event http://www.tweakfest.ch/festival/2007/program/program_detail_de.php?id=prog… 11-15 June 2007, Geneva, Switzerland Provisional Committee on Proposals Related to a WIPO Development Agenda: Fourth Session http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/details.jsp?meeting_id=11927 11-12 June 2007, Strasbourg, France Council of Europe - Octopus Interface 2007 - Cooperation against Cybercrime http://www.coe.int/t/e/legal_affairs/legal_co-operation/combating_economic_… 12 June 2007, Berlin, Germany German Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information - Symposium "Data Protection in Europe" http://www.bfdi.bund.de/cln_029/nn_533554/DE/Oeffentlichkeitsarbeit/Termine… 14 June 2007, Paris, France ENISA/EEMA European eIdentity conference - Next Generation Electronic Identity - eID beyond PKI http://enisa.europa.eu/pages/eID/eID_ws2007.htm 15-17 June 2007, Dubrovnik, Croatia Creative Commons iSummit 2007 http://wiki.icommons.org/index.php/ISummit_2007 17-22 June 2007 Seville, Spain 19th Annual FIRST Conference, "Private Lives and Corporate Risk" http://www.first.org/conference/2007/ 18-22 June 2007, Geneva, Switzerland Second Special Session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/details.jsp?meeting_id=12744 ============================================================ 11. About ============================================================ EDRI-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe. Currently EDRI has 25 members from 16 European countries. European Digital Rights takes an active interest in developments in the EU accession countries and wants to share knowledge and awareness through the EDRI-grams. All contributions, suggestions for content, corrections or agenda-tips are most welcome. Errors are corrected as soon as possible and visibly on the EDRI website. Except where otherwise noted, this newsletter is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 License. See the full text at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Newsletter editor: Bogdan Manolea <edrigram(a)edri.org> Information about EDRI and its members: http://www.edri.org/ - EDRI-gram subscription information subscribe by e-mail To: edri-news-request(a)edri.org Subject: subscribe You will receive an automated e-mail asking to confirm your request. unsubscribe by e-mail To: edri-news-request(a)edri.org Subject: unsubscribe - EDRI-gram in Macedonian EDRI-gram is also available partly in Macedonian, with delay. Translations are provided by Metamorphosis http://www.metamorphosis.org.mk/edrigram-mk.php - EDRI-gram in German EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are provided Andreas Krisch from the EDRI-member VIBE!AT - Austrian Association for Internet Users http://www.unwatched.org/ - Newsletter archive Back issues are available at: http://www.edri.org/edrigram - Help Please ask <edrigram(a)edri.org> if you have any problems with subscribing or unsubscribing. ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

Re: hardware acceleration available for Tor ? On FreeBSD ?
by coderman 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:24 PM, John Case <case(a)sdf.lonestar.org> wrote: > ... > You discuss the performance benefits of using the AES CTR in hardware below, > but before I get to that, I wonder if you experienced the same as what is > quoted just above: that the real CPU load occurs during "the asymmetric-key > processing (i.e., onion-skin encrypting/decrypting)" and that that is the > only area where we can attempt to speed things up with hardware ? speeding up OpenSSL derived CTR mode with hardware acceleration is useful. (the HardwareAccel and EngineName options above) speeding up Tor with native hardware acceleration and chained / repetitive CTR offload is a much bigger win. as an example the VIA Padlock engine can do a few score MBytes/sec aes 128 with small/single block sizes like those used when HardwareAccel is on and EngineName padlock set. if you could utilize the maximum 16KByte rep instruction mode directly goes well over a gigabyte / second. this is also why the native Solaris API CTR mode gives much better performance than the OpenSSL engine acceleration. speeding up OpenSSL pubkey ops also helps. as of OpenSSL 0.9.9 and 1.0.x you can build OpenSSL with padlock MONTMULT acceleration. still no dynamic engine support for pubkey ops iirc... > So, if I understand correctly, the HardwareAccel option can be turned on by > anyone, regardless of OS or hardware platform. It will then (probably) just > do AES CTR with OpenSSL (since most people use OpenSSL) and just get no > benefit because OpenSSL won't do AES CTR through hardware. there will be some benefit as Tor wraps a CTR mode around (accelerated) OpenSSL ECB mode. the problem is that this method is limited to single blocks per call, rather than long buffers optimized for crypto offload. you may also get SHA acceleration. the notices log should say, for example: [info] crypto_global_init(): Initializing OpenSSL engine support. [info] crypto_global_init(): Initializing dynamic OpenSSL engine "padlock" acceleration support. [info] crypto_global_init(): Loaded dynamic OpenSSL engine "padlock". [info] crypto_global_init(): Loaded OpenSSL hardware acceleration engine, setting default ciphers. [info] Using default implementation for RSA [info] Using default implementation for DH [info] Using default implementation for RAND [notice] Using OpenSSL engine VIA PadLock: RNG (not used) ACE2 PHE(8192) PMM [padlock] for SHA1 [info] Using default implementation for 3DES [notice] Using OpenSSL engine VIA PadLock: RNG (not used) ACE2 PHE(8192) PMM [padlock] for AES > So, even if I got a BCM5825 working with with the ubsec driver on FreeBSD, > and used HardwareAccel, it would just be wasted with OpenSSL. not necessarily, per above :) > On the other hand, there are Solaris-specific routines (crypto framework > APIs (PKCS#11)) built into Solaris that Tor can call instead of OpenSSL, > which _will_ do AES CTR in hardware, yielding a huge gain in performance > (you mention 25x). > > Do I have all of that correct ? it would also be nice to have these routines native for other engines, like padlock. however this is not a small amount of effort and no one with time and skill has shown an interest yet. (Tor buffer allocation alignment to 16K, inline padlock instr. calls in REP mode, and other changes required.) > - Are there analogues to the "crypto framework APIs (PKCS#11)" in other OS's > ? What is this layer called for Linux, for instance ? there are kernel cryptographic facilities including asm optimized and hardware accelerated crypto primitives. these are usually not utilized from userspace directly. there are PKCS specs for communicating with offload devices in a concise manner, and libs of various types to speak this to myraid hardware. perhaps a longer discussion should be taken off list... > - How does the T2 (Niagara 2) compare to dedicated hardware such as the Sun > Crypto 6000 which is currently available ? the T2 is core acceleration and thus higher throughput for most purposes. the 6000 is useful as a hardened private key store service for your less trusted OS and software to cooperate with. > - Am I correct that if a new version of OpenSSL appeared with AES CTR > hardware support, an end user could just proceed blindly with card > insertion, driver install, add HardwareAccel=1, and poof! Yes ? Tor would need to be updated to take advantage of the new CTR mode in the OpenSSL API calls, but then the same HardwareAccel (and AccelName) options would provide a significant improvement over the previous acceleration mode. best regards, *********************************************************************** To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo(a)torproject.org with unsubscribe or-talk in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/ ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

[i2p] weekly status notes [jan 11]
by jrandom 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi y'all, time for the weekly update * Index 1) Net status 2) 0.5 progress 3) 0.6 status 4) azneti2p 5) fbsd 6) hosts.txt as WoT 7) ??? * 1) Net status Overall the net is handling itself well, though we had some problems with one of the irc servers being offline and my outproxy acting up. However, the other irc server was (and still is) around (though at the moment doesn't have CTCP disabled - see [1]), so we were able to satiate our need for irc :) [1] http://ugha.i2p/HowTo/IrcAnonymityGuide * 2) 0.5 progress There's progress, ever onwards! Ok, I suppose I should get into a little more detail than that. I've finally got the new tunnel routing crypto implemented and tested (yay!), but during some discussions we found a place where there could be one level of anonymity leak, so its being revised (the first hop would have known they were the first hop, which is Bad. but really really easy to fix). Anyway, I hope to get the docs and code on that updated and posted soon, and docs on the rest of the 0.5 tunnel operation / pooling / etc posted later. More news when there's more news. * 3) 0.6 status (what!?) Mule has begun investigations into the UDP transport, and we've been mining zab for his experiences with limewire's UDP code. Its all very promising, but much work to be done (and still several months out on the roadmap [2]). Got some inspiration or suggestions? Get involved and help focus it towards what needs to be done! [2] http://www.i2p.net/roadmap#0.6 * 4) azneti2p I almost wet my pants when I got the info, but it looks like the folks at azureus have written up an I2P plugin, allowing both anonymous tracker usage and anonymous data comm! Multiple torrents work within a single I2P destination too, and it uses the I2PSocket directly, allowing tight integration with the streaming lib. The azneti2p plugin is still in the early stages with this 0.1 release, and there are lots of optimizations and ease of use improvements coming down the pipe, but if you're up for getting your hands dirty, swing by i2p-bt on the i2p irc networks and get in on the fun :) For the adventurus types, get the latest azureus [3], check their i2p howto [4], and snag the plugin [5]. [3] http://azureus.sourceforge.net/index_CVS.php [4] http://azureus.sourceforge.net/doc/AnonBT/i2p/I2P_howto.htm [5] http://azureus.sourceforge.net/plugin_details.php?plugin=azneti2p duck has been taking heroic measures to keep compatability with i2p-bt, and there is frantic hacking in #i2p-bt as I type this, so keep an eye out for a new i2p-bt release Real Soon Now. * 5) fbsd Thanks to the work of lioux, there's now a freebsd ports entry for i2p [6]. While we aren't really looking to have lots of distro-specific installs out there, he promises to keep it updated when we give sufficient notice for new release. This should be helpful for fbsd-current folks - thanks lioux! [6] http://www.freshports.org/net/i2p/ * 6) hosts.txt as WoT Now that the 0.4.2.6 release has bundled in Ragnarok's addressbook, the process of keeping your hosts.txt populated with new entries is in every user's control. Not only that, but you can view the addressbook subscriptions as a poor-man's web of trust - you import new entries from a site you trust to introduce you to new destinations (defaults being dev.i2p and duck.i2p). With this capacity comes a whole new dimension - the ability for people to choose what sites to essentially link to in their hosts.txt and which ones not to. While there is a place for the public free-for-all that has occurred in the past, now that the naming system is not just in theory but in practice fully distributed, people will need to figure out their own policies on publishing other people's destinations. The important part behind the scenes here is that this is a learning opportunity for the I2P community. Before, both gott and I were trying to help push the naming issue by publishing gott's site as jrandom.i2p (he asked for that site first - I did not, and have no control whatsoever as to the contents of that URL). Now we may begin to explore how we are going to deal with sites not listed in the http://dev.i2p.net/i2p/hosts.txt or on forum.i2p. Not being posted on those locations doesn't prevent in any way a site from operating - your hosts.txt is just your local address book. Anyway, enough babbling, I just wanted to put people on notice so we can all see what is to be done. * 7) ??? Yowza, thats a lot of stuff. Busy week, and I don't forsee things slowing down anytime soon. So, swing on by the meeting in a few minutes and we can talk about stuff. =jr -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFB5D2EGnFL2th344YRAoMnAJsHxgRyB3eydlqKiCy54CYzRCEbsQCfRWV0 ItUMfG4sTnmRKk5m2u9Yxjg= =cJJx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ i2p mailing list i2p(a)i2p.net http://i2p.dnsalias.net/mailman/listinfo/i2p ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]

1 0