Discussion:
THE GREAT AAM OUTAGE OF 2017. Zax?
(too old to reply)
Nomen Nescio
2017-06-26 13:10:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Mailing list traffic and Nym Retrieval all abruptly stopped June 19.
A glance at daily AAM traffic volume before and after June 19 tells
the story.

This is reminiscent of THE GREAT A.A.M. OUTAGE OF 2014, which resolved
after Zax fixed a X-Original-To header problem November 9, 2014. See
thread in apas around that time.

What is it this time?
Anonymous
2017-06-27 02:54:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nomen Nescio
Mailing list traffic and Nym Retrieval all abruptly stopped June 19.
A glance at daily AAM traffic volume before and after June 19 tells
the story.
This is reminiscent of THE GREAT A.A.M. OUTAGE OF 2014, which resolved
after Zax fixed a X-Original-To header problem November 9, 2014. See
thread in apas around that time.
What is it this time?
I agree.

I sent multiple Nym messages today, many hours ago, and never
received
a delivery confirmation for any of them.

Something's wrong.
Zax
2017-06-27 08:55:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Mon, 26 Jun 2017 22:54:42 -0400 (EDT), Anonymous wrote in
Post by Anonymous
Post by Nomen Nescio
Mailing list traffic and Nym Retrieval all abruptly stopped June 19.
A glance at daily AAM traffic volume before and after June 19 tells
the story.
This is reminiscent of THE GREAT A.A.M. OUTAGE OF 2014, which resolved
after Zax fixed a X-Original-To header problem November 9, 2014. See
thread in apas around that time.
What is it this time?
I agree.
I sent multiple Nym messages today, many hours ago, and never
received
a delivery confirmation for any of them.
Something's wrong.
Yes, I think something is wrong too. Something in the upgrade to
Squeeze has likely broken it. The most likely suspect is the upgrade to
gpg v2. I've reverted this back to gnupg-1.4.21 and will see if the
nymserver is happier. Unfortunately, it's logging nothing and syntax
checks reveal no issues. It might take a while to track down the issue.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=fv17
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/228761E7 2003-06-04 Steven Crook <***@mixmin.net>
Key fingerprint = 1CD9 95E1 E9CE 80D6 C885 B7EB B471 80D5 2287 61E7
sub 4096R/BE3EFAA7 created: 2014-11-14 expires: 2016-11-13 usage: S
Nomen Nescio
2017-06-27 16:13:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Zax
It might take a while to track down the issue.
FYI, Nym Retrieval now seems to be working for new requests but mail
that I know is being received by pseudonyms is still being lost.
Post by Zax
Something in the upgrade to Squeeze has likely broken it.
Squeeze? That's already several generations back among Debian
versions.
Zax
2017-06-27 18:44:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 18:13:29 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote in
Post by Nomen Nescio
Post by Zax
It might take a while to track down the issue.
FYI, Nym Retrieval now seems to be working for new requests but mail
that I know is being received by pseudonyms is still being lost.
Post by Zax
Something in the upgrade to Squeeze has likely broken it.
Squeeze? That's already several generations back among Debian
versions.
Sorry, Stretch! Everything going to hell at the moment. Echolot is
also dead.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=B9gv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/228761E7 2003-06-04 Steven Crook <***@mixmin.net>
Key fingerprint = 1CD9 95E1 E9CE 80D6 C885 B7EB B471 80D5 2287 61E7
sub 4096R/BE3EFAA7 created: 2014-11-14 expires: 2016-11-13 usage: S
Nomen Nescio
2017-06-28 15:57:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nomen Nescio
Post by Zax
It might take a while to track down the issue.
FYI, Nym Retrieval now seems to be working for new requests but mail
that I know is being received by pseudonyms is still being lost.
And now Nym Retrieval seems dead too. (Send Confirmations come okay.)
Zax
2017-07-02 16:02:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:10:38 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote in
Post by Nomen Nescio
Mailing list traffic and Nym Retrieval all abruptly stopped June 19.
A glance at daily AAM traffic volume before and after June 19 tells
the story.
This is reminiscent of THE GREAT A.A.M. OUTAGE OF 2014, which resolved
after Zax fixed a X-Original-To header problem November 9, 2014. See
thread in apas around that time.
What is it this time?
After some investigation, it looks like the Nymserver script is not
compatible with gnupg v2.1x. I doubt this is going to be resolved without
recreating a lot of Nyms and probably the nymserver's key. The script
itself would also require some rework as the options on each gpg action
are incompatible.

I've modified the gnupg::interface perl package to use gpg-1.4.1 and I'm
seeing some activity from the nymserver. Can someone with an active
Type-I nym confirm if it's working?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=iM46
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/228761E7 2003-06-04 Steven Crook <***@mixmin.net>
Key fingerprint = 1CD9 95E1 E9CE 80D6 C885 B7EB B471 80D5 2287 61E7
sub 4096R/BE3EFAA7 created: 2014-11-14 expires: 2016-11-13 usage: S
Charles Hairston
2017-07-02 21:20:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Zax
After some investigation, it looks like the Nymserver script is not
compatible with gnupg v2.1x. I doubt this is going to be resolved without
recreating a lot of Nyms and probably the nymserver's key. The script
itself would also require some rework as the options on each gpg action
are incompatible.
I've modified the gnupg::interface perl package to use gpg-1.4.1 and I'm
seeing some activity from the nymserver. Can someone with an active
Type-I nym confirm if it's working?
And here I am! ;)

With an OM nym account test I also got a reply:

| To: "Charles Hairston" <***@nym.mixmin.net>
| Subject: Nym Test
| From: Charles Hairston <***@nym.mixmin.net>
| Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2017 14:00:08 +0100 (BST)
|
| -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- DECODED (Encoding 0x2235C6894AD6A985 (Charles Hairston <***@nym.mixmin.net>)) ...
| This is a nym test message,
| created 2017-07-02 **:**:**.*** LT
| -----END PGP MESSAGE----- ... DECODED (Signature 0x2235C6894AD6A985 - Good signature (SHA256:[2235C6894AD6A985] Charles Hairston <***@nym.mixmin.net>; Fri, 30 Jun 2017 05:20:41 +0000))
|
|
| ~~~
| This PGP signature only certifies the receipt and date of the message.
| It implies no approval from the administrators of nym.mixmin.net.
| Date: Sun Jul 2 13:00:09 2017 GMT
| To: ***@nym.mixmin.net

Thanks for all your efforts!

Stay with GPG 1.4, 2.1 isn't worth it yet.
Zax
2017-07-03 10:42:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Sun, 2 Jul 2017 22:20:10 +0100 (BST), Charles Hairston wrote in
Post by Charles Hairston
Post by Zax
After some investigation, it looks like the Nymserver script is not
compatible with gnupg v2.1x. I doubt this is going to be resolved without
recreating a lot of Nyms and probably the nymserver's key. The script
itself would also require some rework as the options on each gpg action
are incompatible.
I've modified the gnupg::interface perl package to use gpg-1.4.1 and I'm
seeing some activity from the nymserver. Can someone with an active
Type-I nym confirm if it's working?
And here I am! ;)
[snip]
Post by Charles Hairston
Thanks for all your efforts!
Stay with GPG 1.4, 2.1 isn't worth it yet.
Yes, 2.1 is greatly improved in many ways but is unlikely to ever be
compatible with our aging Nymserver script. The last updates to it were
done in 2004! Part of the problem is that PGP evolves and removes
ciphers and hashes that are no longer considered secure. Unfortunately
the script uses some of those, like MD5.

I'm tempted to write a new Nymserver using NaCl keys instead of PGP.
It always nags me though that while I can reproduce the current
functionality, I don't have the skills to deliver a Sphinx-like
solution. If only someone with better crypto skills would produce a
Sphinx library!

For now, I'll leave things as the are and let the old script soldier on.
It might not be perfect or even close to perfect but it's probably as
good, if not better, than any other tool at our disposal.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEYtRzDvCkhhVOX3JsJqfI5MW644EFAllaH4IACgkQJqfI5MW6
44HzRw/9GMMyx8eiVDPe/I5wULzSSb/XL2su8vkFnBXXA4o461jHhOUStb55c4xY
L0IsECkBWnxGHIA/v2SVWv0OqL2aL+LQdMgnEMnOp4iyikIAUEnRtDTxZkYZCRsH
N1PYY/Rnv+Ryu+7RsTX3qs8wWvRBRj5qAyJsYrfGUrkKgmhy4ifS3taY9WjDm390
GaCXIf2QxmnMlVG8l51Dhn+WIhJ2gDt5QRjZunT899pnZDDBFcVmEc4QWKM6Ld0Y
QU4LtWfe9I2m3CkVvdhH/WN+d0a14WTFmrrMU0Y53UKYzGAyOrnZTvHcj+vUUbF3
6BafamdZhAJy0M6iBjLfpNqTZSd8Acf0B9xVE9Uyilmro+M9SZTxtKeto9LgDi3H
zCU0DPGZMTMbl01pP6wLoY+gAFyP3iQigHMpuEcLVLJxA3pMlTa8kDirjneseTLD
R83sHVfMAS1deT8hsVdIxSfx91j3MrhGb7nyyZ0JKe8Wr/6WzTF/eB7sNxsEoDgc
YQFE0GDXOAb5PHtPz+t6lskyOnWnncbJvU6g4zXea2NfBdK/NipeM7AY6R61Hokn
SPgyRpdxjMhc+6DzpumKTs2xWB2BledKT15ylsi+v8BKzIl04SI6PyzPMGC6o6qG
O7mhFNRG63kLDpVUDvFCJ004ev+MA12LMMfImFmRazgQ7uD0Y7c=
=1FX6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/228761E7 2003-06-04 Steven Crook <***@mixmin.net>
Key fingerprint = 1CD9 95E1 E9CE 80D6 C885 B7EB B471 80D5 2287 61E7
sub 4096R/BE3EFAA7 created: 2014-11-14 expires: 2016-11-13 usage: S
Anonymous
2017-07-03 23:42:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Zax
On Sun, 2 Jul 2017 22:20:10 +0100 (BST), Charles Hairston wrote in
Post by Charles Hairston
Stay with GPG 1.4, 2.1 isn't worth it yet.
Yes, 2.1 is greatly improved in many ways
With GnuPG 1.4 we have RSA-4096, AES-256, SHA-512, which should be
secure for years to come. And, different from 2.1, it's stable, fast,
small and easy to embed.
Post by Zax
but is unlikely to ever be
compatible with our aging Nymserver script. The last updates to it were
done in 2004! Part of the problem is that PGP evolves and removes
ciphers and hashes that are no longer considered secure. Unfortunately
the script uses some of those, like MD5.
But do they need them?
Post by Zax
I'm tempted to write a new Nymserver using NaCl keys instead of PGP.
Compatible with what?
Post by Zax
It always nags me though that while I can reproduce the current
functionality, I don't have the skills to deliver a Sphinx-like
solution. If only someone with better crypto skills would produce a
Sphinx library!
What's wrong with what we have now?
Post by Zax
For now, I'll leave things as the are and let the old script soldier on.
It might not be perfect or even close to perfect but it's probably as
good, if not better, than any other tool at our disposal.
ACK. BTW, how many nymserver users are out there now? 50? 100?
Anonymous
2017-07-04 00:53:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anonymous
ACK. BTW, how many nymserver users are out there now? 50? 100?
Ummmmm...................Get the list of used nyms and count them?
Anonymous
2017-07-04 09:27:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anonymous
Post by Anonymous
ACK. BTW, how many nymserver users are out there now? 50? 100?
Ummmmm...................Get the list of used nyms and count them?
It was about an estimation how many users there are, not about accounts.
e***@notatla.org.uk
2017-07-04 06:31:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anonymous
Post by Zax
It always nags me though that while I can reproduce the current
functionality, I don't have the skills to deliver a Sphinx-like
solution. If only someone with better crypto skills would produce a
Sphinx library!
What's wrong with what we have now?
Reply capability now exists only for type 1 and the security
of sphinx (against tagging attacks) is better than both current
types 1 and 2.
Anonymous
2017-07-04 11:10:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by e***@notatla.org.uk
Post by Anonymous
Post by Zax
It always nags me though that while I can reproduce the current
functionality, I don't have the skills to deliver a Sphinx-like
solution. If only someone with better crypto skills would produce a
Sphinx library!
What's wrong with what we have now?
Reply capability now exists only for type 1 and the security
of sphinx (against tagging attacks) is better than both current
types 1 and 2.
Isn't my reply address part of the Sphinx message, which, despite
encryption, makes me more nervous than selecting aam messages based on
an esub encoding nobody can connect with my identity?
Zax
2017-07-04 16:54:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 11:10:37 +0000 (UTC), Anonymous wrote in
Post by Anonymous
Post by e***@notatla.org.uk
Post by Anonymous
Post by Zax
It always nags me though that while I can reproduce the current
functionality, I don't have the skills to deliver a Sphinx-like
solution. If only someone with better crypto skills would produce a
Sphinx library!
What's wrong with what we have now?
Reply capability now exists only for type 1 and the security
of sphinx (against tagging attacks) is better than both current
types 1 and 2.
Isn't my reply address part of the Sphinx message, which, despite
encryption, makes me more nervous than selecting aam messages based on
an esub encoding nobody can connect with my identity?
You create a Single Use Reply Block and include it with the outbound
message. The recipient can then use the SURB to reply. The destination
within the SURB could be an email, a mail2news, or directives to an
altogether new protocol.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=gPMY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/228761E7 2003-06-04 Steven Crook <***@mixmin.net>
Key fingerprint = 1CD9 95E1 E9CE 80D6 C885 B7EB B471 80D5 2287 61E7
sub 4096R/BE3EFAA7 created: 2014-11-14 expires: 2016-11-13 usage: S
Cornelis Tromp
2017-07-02 22:03:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Zax
On Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:10:38 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote in
Post by Nomen Nescio
Mailing list traffic and Nym Retrieval all abruptly stopped June 19.
A glance at daily AAM traffic volume before and after June 19 tells
the story.
This is reminiscent of THE GREAT A.A.M. OUTAGE OF 2014, which resolved
after Zax fixed a X-Original-To header problem November 9, 2014. See
thread in apas around that time.
What is it this time?
After some investigation, it looks like the Nymserver script is not
compatible with gnupg v2.1x. I doubt this is going to be resolved without
recreating a lot of Nyms and probably the nymserver's key. The script
itself would also require some rework as the options on each gpg action
are incompatible.
I've modified the gnupg::interface perl package to use gpg-1.4.1 and I'm
seeing some activity from the nymserver. Can someone with an active
Type-I nym confirm if it's working?
Zax, you must be tearing your hair out with this one.

Thank you for all you do.

Currently testing:

AAM downloaded more messages today than in the past few days.
Assume traffic is increased. Looks like a good sign.

So far one Type-I nym message received.
e***@notatla.org.uk
2017-07-03 18:55:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Zax
After some investigation, it looks like the Nymserver script is not
compatible with gnupg v2.1x. I doubt this is going to be resolved without
recreating a lot of Nyms and probably the nymserver's key. The script
itself would also require some rework as the options on each gpg action
are incompatible.
I've modified the gnupg::interface perl package to use gpg-1.4.1 and I'm
seeing some activity from the nymserver. Can someone with an active
Type-I nym confirm if it's working?
The platypus software uses the local gpg program
which does have md5 where I run it.

***@notatla:~/lib> gpg --version
gpg (GnuPG) 2.0.24
libgcrypt 1.6.1
Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>
This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.

Home: ~/.gnupg
Supported algorithms:
Pubkey: RSA, ELG, DSA
Cipher: IDEA, 3DES, CAST5, BLOWFISH, AES, AES192, AES256, TWOFISH,
CAMELLIA128, CAMELLIA192, CAMELLIA256
Hash: MD5, SHA1, RIPEMD160, SHA256, SHA384, SHA512, SHA224
Compression: Uncompressed, ZIP, ZLIB, BZIP2


https://github.com/merkinmuffley/platypus_type1_pinger
Zax
2017-07-04 08:55:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Post by e***@notatla.org.uk
The platypus software uses the local gpg program
which does have md5 where I run it.
gpg (GnuPG) 2.0.24
libgcrypt 1.6.1
Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>
This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
Home: ~/.gnupg
Pubkey: RSA, ELG, DSA
Cipher: IDEA, 3DES, CAST5, BLOWFISH, AES, AES192, AES256, TWOFISH,
CAMELLIA128, CAMELLIA192, CAMELLIA256
Hash: MD5, SHA1, RIPEMD160, SHA256, SHA384, SHA512, SHA224
Compression: Uncompressed, ZIP, ZLIB, BZIP2
https://github.com/merkinmuffley/platypus_type1_pinger
I'll take a look at it. The issue with GnuPG occurs in >=2.1.

gpg (GnuPG) 2.1.18
libgcrypt 1.7.6-beta
Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later
<https://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>
This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.

Home: /home/crooks/.gnupg
Supported algorithms:
Pubkey: RSA, ELG, DSA, ECDH, ECDSA, EDDSA
Cipher: IDEA, 3DES, CAST5, BLOWFISH, AES, AES192, AES256, TWOFISH,
CAMELLIA128, CAMELLIA192, CAMELLIA256
Hash: SHA1, RIPEMD160, SHA256, SHA384, SHA512, SHA224
Compression: Uncompressed, ZIP, ZLIB, BZIP2

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=UAMq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/228761E7 2003-06-04 Steven Crook <***@mixmin.net>
Key fingerprint = 1CD9 95E1 E9CE 80D6 C885 B7EB B471 80D5 2287 61E7
sub 4096R/BE3EFAA7 created: 2014-11-14 expires: 2016-11-13 usage: S
Nomen Nescio
2017-07-03 11:43:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
JNym server replies are now coming again! THANK YOU, ZAX!! You must
feel like the weight of the world has been lifted from your shoulders.

On the other hand, apart from that brief restoration around June 27,
Nym Retrieval is dead. The send confirmations show up on AAM, but not
the requested pages.
Nomen Nescio
2017-07-05 22:10:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Nym Retrieval is not working. The send confirmations show up on AAM,
but not the requested pages.

Another user says "All my nyms @mixnym.net are still not working."
Might be the same problem?

Symptoms the same as we've seen several times before.
Zax
2017-07-06 10:01:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 00:10:51 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote in
Post by Nomen Nescio
Nym Retrieval is not working. The send confirmations show up on AAM,
but not the requested pages.
Might be the same problem?
Symptoms the same as we've seen several times before.
Hopefully it's sorted now. Please can you confirm?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=+TSA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/228761E7 2003-06-04 Steven Crook <***@mixmin.net>
Key fingerprint = 1CD9 95E1 E9CE 80D6 C885 B7EB B471 80D5 2287 61E7
sub 4096R/BE3EFAA7 created: 2014-11-14 expires: 2016-11-13 usage: S
Nomen Nescio
2017-07-06 16:28:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Zax
Hopefully it's sorted now. Please can you confirm?
Confirmed! It works! (testcount = 1)
Cornelis Tromp
2017-07-07 01:16:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nomen Nescio
Post by Zax
Hopefully it's sorted now. Please can you confirm?
Confirmed! It works! (testcount = 1)
Much better, thanks!

All nyms @mixnym.net are working fine now.
Zax
2017-07-07 10:18:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 02:16:16 +0100 (BST), Cornelis Tromp wrote in
Post by Cornelis Tromp
Post by Nomen Nescio
Post by Zax
Hopefully it's sorted now. Please can you confirm?
Confirmed! It works! (testcount = 1)
Much better, thanks!
Excellent, thanks for letting me know!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=bz0v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/228761E7 2003-06-04 Steven Crook <***@mixmin.net>
Key fingerprint = 1CD9 95E1 E9CE 80D6 C885 B7EB B471 80D5 2287 61E7
sub 4096R/BE3EFAA7 created: 2014-11-14 expires: 2016-11-13 usage: S
Loading...