- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Where to write crypto?
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:05 PM 9/25/96, s1113645(a)tesla.cc.uottawa.ca wrote: >Why go so far, when you can export crypto from Anguila or Canada. The ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >first is right next to Florida and is a tax haven, the second has a large >talent pool and the same qulity telecom as the States. The main problem is >concealing the fact that there may be any Americans involved. Both save >you the trouble of learning Chinese. Are you _sure_ about what you say about Canada? After all, in nearly all defense- and crypto-related matters, they are essentially the 51st State. In fact, Canada is one of the places crypto may be exported _to_ from the U.S. without any license. So, export strong crypto into Canada and then invoke the "you can export crypto from...Canada" clause? I don't think so. As to Anguilla, I fear it's too small an island and too tightly controlled by the Ruling Families, who will take action if the boat gets rocked enough. The recent experiences with Vince essentially repudiating certain policies he had publically announced have left his experiment with not a lot of "backbone" (no pun intended). As Vince said, paraphrasing his comments, the government of Anguilla will take steps to stop things which cast the island in a bad light. Not much of a haven, eh? --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

FW: Now we have it all
by Butler, Scott 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Abaddon wrote: >>susbscribe Surely we have seen it all now. I find it hard to believe that a word like suscribe....subsribe....subcribes.. SUBSCRIBE..is so difficult to spell correctly. :-) ScOtT

2 1

Edited Edupage, 19 Sept 1996
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"educom(a)educom.unc.edu" 20-SEP-1996 01:52:41.56 >***************************************************************** >Edupage, 19 September 1996. Edupage, a summary of news about information >technology, is provided three times a week as a service by Educom, >a Washington, D.C.-based consortium of leading colleges and universities >seeking to transform education through the use of information technology. >***************************************************************** >LUCENT'S NET SOFTWARE MAKES INTERNET PHONE CALLS EASY >New software developed by Lucent Technologies is designed to give Internet >callers quicker access to one another and allows them to converse via their >computers as if they were on a regular speaker-phone. Previous software has >been half-duplex -- one party must stop speaking before the other can >"capture" the line. Lucent plans to market the software to AT&T, the Bell >companies and Internet service providers for distribution to their >customers. By the end of the year, Lucent plans to enhance the software so >that users can videoconference over the Internet. (Wall Street Journal 18 >Sep 96 B8) I'd wonder if a patch can be built to encrypt each packet as it goes out? I'm guessing that what they've done is improve the voice compression, so there will be a relatively small amount of data to encrypt. >PROGRAMMABLE COMPUTER CHIPS >Next month, Metalithic Systems Inc. will release a $1500 sound board called >Digital Wings that uses field-programmable gate array computer chips that >can be personalized, allowing the user to create and edit up to 128 >soundtracks. When used in combination with Windows 95, Digital Wings will >give users access to audio synthesis and editing tools comparable to those >of a professional sound studio. (Business Week 23 Sep 96 p86) I wonder exactly how reprogrammable this system is... >Edupage is written by John Gehl <gehl(a)educom.edu> & Suzanne Douglas ><douglas(a)educom.edu>. Voice: 404-371-1853, Fax: 404-371-8057. >Technical support is provided by Information Technology Services at the >University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. >*************************************************************** >Edupage ... is what you've just finished reading. To subscribe to Edupage: >send mail to: listproc(a)educom.unc.edu with the message: subscribe edupage >Alfred Adler (if your name is Alfred Adler; otherwise, substitute your own >name). ... To cancel, send a message to: listproc(a)educom.unc.edu with the >message: unsubscribe edupage. (If you have subscription problems, send >mail to manager(a)educom.unc.edu.)

1 0

Insider Trading - What constitutes "Disclosure" ?
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This is not legal advice. You got it for free. Often the choice faced by the investor who has material non-public information is characterized as "disclose or abstain," meaning that the investor may either trade after disclosing or abstain from trading on the information. A few people have asked me what constitutes disclosure. I've not researched the latest cases, but the generally accepted "best description" can be found in SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulpher Co., 401 F.2d 833 (2d Cir.1968), cert. denied. As to the defense's claim that their purchases of stock were not proscribed because the news had effectively been disclosed, the court offered: (errors mine) Crawford (defendant) telephoned his orders to his Chicago broker about midnight on April 15 and again at 8:30 in the morning of the 16th, with instructions to buy at the opening of the Midwest Stock Exchange. The trial court's finding that "he sought to, and did, 'beat the news,' 258 F.Supp. at 287, is well documented by the record.. The rumors of a major ore strike which had been circulated in Canada and , to a lesser extent, in New York, had been disclaimed by the TGS press release of April 12, which significantly promised the public an official detailed announcement when possibilities had ripened into actualities. The abbreviated announcement to the Canadian press at 9:40 A.M. on the 16th by the Ontario Minister of Mines and the report carried by the Northern Miner, parts of which had sporadically reached New York on the morning of the 16th through reports from Canadian affiliates to a few New York investment firms, are assuredly not the equivalent of the official 10-15 minute announcement which was not released to teh American financial press until after 10:00 AM. Crawford's orders had been placed before that. **Before insiders may act upon material information, such information must have been effectively disclosed in a manner sufficient to insure its availability to the investing public.** Particularly here, whre a formal announcement to the entire financial news media had been promised in a prior official release known to the media, all insider activity must await dissemination of the promised official announcement. Coates was absolved by the court below because his telephone order was placed shortly before 10:20 AM on April 16, which was after the announcement had been made public even though the news could not be considered already a matter of public information. 258 F.Supp at 288. This result seems to have been predicated upon a misinterpretation of dicta in Cady, Roberts, where the SEC instructed insiders to "keep out of the market until the estlablished procedures for public release of the information are carried out instead of hastening to execute transactions in advance of, and in frustration of, the objectives of the release," 40 S.E.C. at 915. The reading of a news release, which promoted Coates into action, is merely the first step in the process of dissemination required for compliance with the regulatory objective of providing all investors with an equal opportuinity to make informed investment judgements. Assuming that the contents of the official release could have been instantaneously be acted upon, at the minimum Coates should have waited until the news could reasonably have been expcted to appear over the media of widest circulation, the Dow Jones broad tape, rather than hastening to insure an advantage to himself and his broker son-in-law. -- I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist unicorn(a)schloss.li

1 0

PGP plugin for Netscape?
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I could swear I read something about a PGP plugin called livepgp, and Altavista can't find it, and I can't glimpse it in my archives of the list. Anyone got a pointer? Please post to the list; making it more likely that a search engine will find this in the future, and we won't get a rash of 'me toos.' Thanks, Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

Re: AP [was: Re: Kiddie porn on the Internet] [NOISE]
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:24 AM 9/24/96 -0700, Dale Thorn wrote: >Lessee if I have this right, now. We have basically three scenarios: > >1. Allow the status quo to continue (the justice system scam now run by > Janet Reno/Louis Freeh types et al. >2. Allow the people some democracy in applying justice through AP. >3. Sometime in the future, build the Gort(?) robots, as in The Day The > Earth Stood Still, and let them do the job. > >Whatcha think? That's about it. I long ago noticed the similarity between AP and the fictional Gort. Problem is, Gort would have to be programmed. How would you write such a program? Governments would want their hand in it. They'd insist on "government exceptions" to rules, like: "All violence is forbiddden! (except for violence by duly authorized government employees!)" Not very practical. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

Re: An idle thought on CBC and block lengths
by PhneCards＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Did you know this company is using your email address as part of an unlawful email bomb? I would advise you to write to them at cypherpunks(a)toad.com and owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com and advise them to stop using your email address for this type of activity. It is illegal to use a invalid return email address. If this continues, I will be forced to prosecute the return email address - which they are making to look like you. Below is the letter that I received in my email box ================================================= In a message dated 96-09-25 15:52:17 EDT, you write: >Subj: An idle thought on CBC and block lengths >Date: 96-09-25 15:52:17 EDT >From: osborne(a)gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > >So I was sitting bored at home and thinking to myself: CBC is cool. >Without the key, you're screwed because a single bit error propagates >throughout the entire message. But then I was thinking, yeah, but you can >still eventually get the ONE key. So I began to wonder what the difference >in security is between encrypting an entire M with just one K in CBC, or >encrypting M with permutations of K over specific block lengths. > >On the one hand you've got just one key, which makes it that much harder to >find in the keyspace. On the other hand, If evil interloper Eve gets her >hands it, she has to find all of the keys to get all of M. (Assuming she >is using brute force and can't necessarily find the master K to permute >into the subkeys.) > >The downsides are of course that on the one side you've got just one key, >and once you get it, you get M. But on the other hand, you can get any one >part of the message with less difficulty because of the higher number of >keys. And, of course, if your master K is easy to brute force, then it's >actually worse than the first option. > >Does anyone have opinions / knowledge of which is better? > > >____________________________________________________________ >Rick Osborne osborne(a)gateway.grumman.com >"The universe doesn't give you any points for doing things that are easy." > > > >----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- >From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Wed Sep 25 15:51:46 1996 >Return-Path: cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com >Received: from mailhub.MyMail.Com (mailhub.mymail.com [206.247.118.1]) by >emin14.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA04207 for ><phnecards(a)aol.com>; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 15:51:43 -0400 >Received: from toad.com by mailhub.MyMail.Com (5.x/SMI-SVR4) > id AA27411; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 13:47:22 -0600 >Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA16059 for >cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 05:57:39 -0700 (PDT) >Received: from gateway.grumman.com (gateway.grumman.com [192.86.71.8]) by >toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA16054 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Wed, >25 Sep 1996 05:57:32 -0700 (PDT) >Message-Id: <3.0b19.32.19960925085644.0068cb90(a)gateway.grumman.com> >X-Sender: osborne(a)gateway.grumman.com >X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0b19 (32) >Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 08:56:45 -0400 >To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >From: Rick Osborne <osborne(a)gateway.grumman.com> >Subject: An idle thought on CBC and block lengths >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Precedence: bulk

2 1

Re: Hallam-Baker demands more repudiations or he'll write!
by PhneCards＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Did you know this company is using your email address as part of an unlawful email bomb? I would advise you to write to them at cypherpunks(a)toad.com and owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com and advise them to stop using your email address for this type of activity. It is illegal to use a invalid return email address. If this continues, I will be forced to prosecute the return email address - which they are making to look like you. Below is the letter that I received in my email box ================================================= In a message dated 96-09-25 14:05:23 EDT, you write: >Subj: Re: Hallam-Baker demands more repudiations or he'll write! >Date: 96-09-25 14:05:23 EDT >From: jimbell(a)pacifier.com (jim bell) >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >To: bdavis(a)thepoint.net (Brian Davis) >CC: cypherpunks(a)toad.com, jf_avon(a)citenet.net > >At 11:50 PM 9/24/96 -0400, Brian Davis wrote: >>On Tue, 24 Sep 1996, Rich Burroughs wrote: >> >>> <AP stuff> >>> Anyone who mistakes the lack of "repudiations" for AP on the list for some >>> kind of tacit approval is not getting the whole picture, IMHO. >>> >>> Is this how journalists do their research nowadays -- "give me some info >or >>> I'll write something really bad about you that you'll regret?" Cool. I >>> guess I thought there might still be some kind of pursuit of the truth >>> involved. >>> >>> I personally don't have the time or energy to contribute to the AP >threads. >>> That != approval for the idea. >>> >>> I hope you include your above quote in your piece. >>> >> >>Amen to that. Add that at least one lawyer (and former prosecutor) on >>the list is confident that successful prosecutions will ensue is AP ever >>gets off the ground. > >I don't doubt that there will be harassment. (you can't deny that charges >would be brought even if it is tacitly agreed that no crime has been >committed; "the harassment-value" of such a prosecution would be desired >even if there is ultimately an acquittal.) AP will resemble, more than >anything, gambling. While gambling is illegal in some areas, it is quite >legal in others and there is no reason to believe that locales can't be >found in which an AP system could operate legally. > >Make American laws apply everywhere? That'll be hard to justify, unless you >want to unleash a world where an all people can be subject simultaneously to >the laws of EVERY country, should they choose to enforce them! Would you >like to be arrested in Red China for something you said years earlier in >America about their leadership? > > And are you ignoring the fact that the intentional isolation of one >participant from the knowledge of the actions and even the identity of the >others makes opportunities for prosecution on "conspiracy" charges mighty >slim. And since AP can operate across traditional jurisdictional >boundaries, you're going to have to explain how you can prosecute Person A >in Country B for giving a donation to an organization in Country C, to be >paid to a person D in country E for correctly predicting the death of person >F in country G, particularly when none of the identities of these people or >countries can be easily known given a well-crafted cryptographic and >message-routing system. > > Further, as you probably know as well as any, in order (at least, >supposedly!) to get a conviction you need to prove "mens rea," or "guilty >mind," and I suggest that none of the more passive participants in the AP >system have that. (The ones who DON'T pick up a gun, knife, bomb, poison, >etc.) Sure, they are aware that somewhere, sometime, somebody _may_ commit >a crime in order to collect a lottery, but they don't know who, what, when, >where, or how this will occur, if at all. (either before or after the fact!) > In fact, since it is possible for a target to collect the reward himself >(to be directed toward his designee, obviously) by committing suicide and >"predicting" it, it isn't certain to the other participants that there has >even been any sort of crime committed! > >Based on the mens rea requirement, I propose that there is plenty of room >for most of the participants to reasonably claim that they are guilty of no >crime. They have carefully shielded themselves and others from any guilty >knowledge, and presumably they are entitled to protect themselves in this >way. Morally, you could argue that these people are countenancing something >nasty, in the same sense that somebody could equally well argue that if you >buy a cheap shirt in Walmart you're partly responsible for sweatshop labor >in El Salvador. True, I suppose, but moral guilt does not always translate >into legal guilt. > > >> And yes, I've read Jim Bell's manifesto. The fact >>that no lawyer has dissected it from a legal standpoint has been used by >>Mr. Bell as support for the propostion that it is legal. > >I suggest that there is a greater likelihood that the "powers that be" will >just abandon all pretense of legality, and attempt to strike at the >participants if they can find them without benefit of any sort of trial. >This is a more plausible conclusion, because it cuts through all of the >legal difficulties which would hinder prosecution. In effect, a low-level >undeclared war. > > >Jim Bell >jimbell(a)pacifier.com > > >----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- >From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Wed Sep 25 11:04:24 1996 >Return-Path: cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com >Received: from mailhub.MyMail.Com (mailhub.mymail.com [206.247.118.1]) by >emin14.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA03061 for ><phnecards(a)aol.com>; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 11:04:18 -0400 >Received: from toad.com by mailhub.MyMail.Com (5.x/SMI-SVR4) > id AA26654; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 09:04:05 -0600 >Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id AAA10103 for >cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 00:55:24 -0700 (PDT) >Received: from mail.pacifier.com (root(a)mail.pacifier.com [199.2.117.164]) by >toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA10098 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; >Wed, 25 Sep 1996 00:55:16 -0700 (PDT) >Received: from ip20.van1.pacifier.com (ip20.van1.pacifier.com [206.163.4.20]) >by mail.pacifier.com (8.7.6-pac/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA14065; Wed, 25 Sep >1996 00:55:14 -0700 (PDT) >Message-Id: <199609250755.AAA14065(a)mail.pacifier.com> >X-Sender: jimbell(a)mail.pacifier.com >X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 00:55:21 -0800 >To: Brian Davis <bdavis(a)thepoint.net> >From: jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> >Subject: Re: Hallam-Baker demands more repudiations or he'll write! >Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com, jf_avon(a)citenet.net >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Precedence: bulk

1 0

Re: Lexis and Privacy - Bill approaches.
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Stop sending me messages like this. This is getting annoying. --TCM At 10:13 PM 9/25/96, PhneCards(a)aol.com wrote: >Did you know this company is using your email address as part of >an unlawful email bomb? > >I would advise you to write to them at cypherpunks(a)toad.com >and owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com and advise them to stop >using your email address for this type of activity. > >It is illegal to use a invalid return email address. If this continues, I >will >be forced to prosecute the return email address - which they are >making to look like you. > >Below is the letter that I received in my email box >================================================= > >In a message dated 96-09-25 15:12:13 EDT, you write: > >>Subj: Re: Lexis and Privacy - Bill approaches. >>Date: 96-09-25 15:12:13 EDT >>From: declan(a)eff.org (Declan McCullagh) >>Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >>To: unicorn(a)schloss.li (Black Unicorn) >>CC: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >> >>This would be good if the bills were written well and thoughtfully. >>Unfortunately, they explicitly extend executive branch regulatory >>jurisdiction to the Net. At least the one I read did; I understand there >>are multiple versions. >> >>-Declan >> >> >>On Tue, 24 Sep 1996, Black Unicorn wrote: >> >>> >>> Pressure from the FTC Which fielded hundreds of complaints about Lexis and >>> the social security number scrap) has prompted members of the Banking >>> Committee to add provisions to the most recent spending bills which >>> protect personal information (including social security numbers, phone >>> numbers, addresses, and so forth) under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. >>> This limits access to this information to credit agencies and otherwise >>> authorized entities. (Of which I assume Lexis is not one). >>> >>> It's not great protection, but it's something. >>> >>> I urge everyone to take their own measures to protect personal data >>> regardless of what some piece of paper on a library shelf says is >>> protected. The only real protection is not to allow release of the data >>> in the first place. >>> >>> -- >>> I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist >>> unicorn(a)schloss.li >>> >> >> >>// declan(a)eff.org // I do not represent the EFF // declan(a)well.com // >> >> >> >> >>----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- >>From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Wed Sep 25 15:11:39 1996 >>Return-Path: cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com >>Received: from mailhub.MyMail.Com (mailhub.mymail.com [206.247.118.1]) by >>emin14.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA10310 for >><phnecards(a)aol.com>; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 15:11:34 -0400 >>Received: from toad.com by mailhub.MyMail.Com (5.x/SMI-SVR4) >> id AA27335; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 13:11:11 -0600 >>Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA15636 >for >>cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 05:06:43 -0700 (PDT) >>Received: from eff.org (declan(a)eff.org [204.253.162.3]) by toad.com >>(8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA15631 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Wed, 25 Sep >>1996 05:06:39 -0700 (PDT) >>Received: (from declan@localhost) by eff.org (8.7.5/8.6.6) id FAA10228; Wed, >>25 Sep 1996 05:06:38 -0700 (PDT) >>Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 05:06:38 -0700 (PDT) >>From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)eff.org> >>To: Black Unicorn <unicorn(a)schloss.li> >>Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >>Subject: Re: Lexis and Privacy - Bill approaches. >>In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.94.960924190706.9902A-100000@polaris> >>Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960925050416.10072A-100000(a)eff.org> >>Mime-Version: 1.0 >>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII >>Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >>Precedence: bulk -- [This Bible excerpt awaiting review under the U.S. Communications Decency Act of 1996] And then Lot said, "I have some mighty fine young virgin daughters. Why don't you boys just come on in and fuck them right here in my house - I'll just watch!"....Later, up in the mountains, the younger daughter said: "Dad's getting old. I say we should fuck him before he's too old to fuck." So the two daughters got him drunk and screwed him all that night. Sure enough, Dad got them pregnant, and had an incestuous bastard son....Onan really hated the idea of doing his brother's wife and getting her pregnant while his brother got all the credit, so he pulled out before he came....Remember, it's not a good idea to have sex with your sister, your brother, your parents, your pet dog, or the farm animals, unless of course God tells you to. [excerpts from the Old Testament, Modern Vernacular Translation, TCM, 1996]

1 0

Newsgroup proposal: misc.anonymous
by Mark M. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In an effort to get anonymity and message pools more widespread, I think it would be a good idea to establish a newsgroup for anonymous message pools that would get the same distribution as any other newsgroup in the "big 8". The "misc" hierarchy is probably the best place for such a newsgroup since it already carries groups like "misc.misc" and "misc.test". Does anyone have any suggestions or objections? Mark - -- PGP encrypted mail prefered. Key fingerprint = d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348 http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMknvNSzIPc7jvyFpAQHnmAf/SmvkV71/p3V2ZzCZApBk2TXD3wVifxi/ ljjRcuaGGs/iDJ1xKuTDGj5qIicM3Y3CSsnedS2g15RtAIpU7IdBKNsa4D55F2vI TJSElzqoqPMlAQRLq45v92DlG9d5zQopfqlT9bkGXZ1DDfTGg2q+F0HUqLYAZC1r DVU+iShjWUjX+0qxvKDClXSLLizdz6QHjTUTuE0PEdYf03KI0rqt/Dceh3iU2BWm bHYS20mHLv0fjdGMEVzBtul6mNfkcrYR2eyYxpWKtPtGzrw3NsSrI+ZYxT74I8S6 e2uB+Evnvl0dauLwhxWrdo4ILW0A9ekKfSrEVkRybBSKp8di2vwCqw== =cgnu -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 7