On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:12:04 -0800 (PST) algenon flower
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Eugen,, That sounds like some good news coming from EU! I hope for success
> to challenges in Germany to their attempt at repressive law. I am in US.
Good grief! How wide a window do you type in?
>
Eugen,, That sounds like some good news coming from EU! I hope for success to
challenges in Germany to their attempt at repressive law. I am in US.
As everyone knows, we seem to lead the world in this kind of stuff. I think the
whole censorship and control mindset seems to have come into offic
Eugen Leitl wrote:
> Data retention law has just been passed in Germany. Here's the list
> of who voted how
>
>
> http://www.bundestag.de/parlament/plenargeschehen/abstimmung/20071109_teleueberwach.pdf
>
> This will be contested as unconstitutional, but in cases it
> will become law all T
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 11:59:43AM -0800, Mike Perry wrote:
> Oh, and I'm also wondering about redundancy. If I run a Tor node in
> Germany is it the case that I have to log, AND my ISP has to log, AND
> their colo provider has to log, AND the upstream ISP has to log, AND the
That would be intere
Thus spake Smuggler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Olaf Selke wrote:
> > Eugen Leitl wrote:
> >> On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 08:14:34PM +0100, Olaf Selke wrote:
> >>
> >>> nothing will change for German tor operators due to this law. It defines
> >>> how to store and how to hand over stored data to the author
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Perry wrote:
> Thus spake Smuggler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
>> Olaf Selke wrote:
>>> Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 08:14:34PM +0100, Olaf Selke wrote:
> nothing will change for German tor operators due to this law. It def
Thus spake Smuggler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Olaf Selke wrote:
> > Eugen Leitl wrote:
> >> On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 08:14:34PM +0100, Olaf Selke wrote:
> >>
> >>> nothing will change for German tor operators due to this law. It defines
> >>> how to store and how to hand over stored data to the author
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 11:46:07AM -0500, Hans S. wrote:
>> TOR Admin (gpfTOR1) wrote:
>>> I will try it for email (fon, mobile and sms may be nearly like this):
>> For mobile calls and SMS messages, the cell location of the caller/
>> sender at the beginning of the call must be recorded.
> Plea
On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 08:12:35PM +0100, linux wrote:
> do you know what is a timestamp in terms of this law? today, 11pm
>> 2: anon server:
>> In my opinion, an anon sever has to log every replacement of a
>> sender ID by his own ID and the time stamp of this replacement.
>> Tor
On Nov 12, 2007 1:26 PM, Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 01:13:23PM -0700, Kasimir Gabert wrote:
>
> > The Overnet idea seems a tad silly. If connections in between servers
>
> I don't know how well hidden services and current Tor codebase scales,
> but having an a
On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 01:13:23PM -0700, Kasimir Gabert wrote:
> The Overnet idea seems a tad silly. If connections in between servers
I don't know how well hidden services and current Tor codebase scales,
but having an anonymous communication space is certainly worthwhile,
even if read-only. D
On Nov 12, 2007 12:13 PM, linux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Timing attacs can be done only with accurate data.
> What if my server has a wrong time or its clock is changing speed randomly
> or ...
>
>
> I think some more clever people then me will come up with an idea soon.
> I am sure tor develop
Timing attacs can be done only with accurate data.
What if my server has a wrong time or its clock is changing speed randomly
or ...
I think some more clever people then me will come up with an idea soon.
I am sure tor developers will soon improve tor. We should of course do a lot
in fighting
On Sunday 11 November 2007 10:43, TOR Admin (gpfTOR1) wrote:
do you know what is a timestamp in terms of this law? today, 11pm
> 2: anon server:
> In my opinion, an anon sever has to log every replacement of a
> sender ID by his own ID and the time stamp of this replacement.
> Tor
Andrew kirjoitti:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marko Sihvo schrieb:
Eugen Leitl kirjoitti:
Yes, I agree, ordinarily this is morally despicable, but this is
war, and we haven't started it.
"SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM"
Bad idea. Right now we're not crimina
On Nov 12, 2007 3:15 AM, algenon flower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello
> I just hardly can't believe it what I am hearing about this. From what I
> get, it sounds like a full on assault on privacy and free speech, the things
> that make the internet good, has begun.
> I am very sorry to hea
;reveal" enough?
Algenon
"Hans S." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Original Message
From: Marco Gruss
Apparently from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: or-talk@freehaven.net
Subject: Re: 20090101 (log data)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 16:27:39
Matej Kovacic schrieb:
> I agree. But what about building Tor server and client into popular P2P
> clients?
There is a project to spread out Tor by pre-configured
DSL-modem/WLAN-router.
http://wiki.freunde-der-freiheit.de/index.php/TOR-Campaign
They have a mailing list. I do not know, if a route
Hi,
>> "SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM"
> Bad idea. Right now we're not criminals, and can even convince the
> interested public of that.
> If we'd start shooting back we would lose public support. Which is the
> factor that will decide this war.
>
> Plus, it would never "really" work. Antivirus softw
(Disclaimer: I'm not doing it, nor will I ever do it, so raiding my
place is completely pointless; and once you've ruined my life
sufficiently, you and yours will pay dearly, and in person).
Not think you're being a tad melodramatic there?
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Da
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marko Sihvo schrieb:
> Eugen Leitl kirjoitti:
>> Yes, I agree, ordinarily this is morally despicable, but this is
>> war, and we haven't started it.
>>
>
> "SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM"
Bad idea. Right now we're not criminals, and can even convince the
Eugen Leitl kirjoitti:
Yes, I agree, ordinarily this is morally despicable, but this is war,
and we haven't started it.
I agree...
Acting like saint will end up in the death of anonymity and free
communciations... Welcome to the real world...
"SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM"
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 11:46:07AM -0500, Hans S. wrote:
> I personally begin to look around for places to set up my node (and
> myself;) in other parts of the world.
When you do this, make sure you that the server/IP is not registered
to you personally, and make sure the means of payment are not
Original Message
From: Marco Gruss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Apparently from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: or-talk@freehaven.net
Subject: Re: 20090101 (log data)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 16:27:39 +0100
> Hi,
>
> TOR Admin (gpfTOR1) wrote:
> > I will try it for email (fo
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: or-talk@freehaven.net
> Gesendet: 10.11.07 06:38:52
> An: or-talk@freehaven.net
> Betreff: Re: 20090101
>
> Am Freitag, 9. November 2007 schrieb Eugen Leitl:
> > On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 07:42:46PM +0100, Valen MacLeod wrote
Hi,
TOR Admin (gpfTOR1) wrote:
I will try it for email (fon, mobile and sms may be nearly like this):
For mobile calls and SMS messages, the cell location of the caller/
sender at the beginning of the call must be recorded.
Pretty ugly, IMHO.
Marco
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 10:43:03 +0100
"TOR Admin (gpfTOR1)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I will try it for email (fon, mobile and sms may be nearly like this):
thank you ;-)
Paolo Amoroso schrieb:
> On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 09:03:19 +
> Smuggler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> It says: Store these specific datasets
>
> since i'm italian and i don't know your language, i'm curious about
> which data must be retained by each service.
> Could you list them, in english?
>
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 09:03:19 +
Smuggler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It says: Store these specific datasets
since i'm italian and i don't know your language, i'm curious about
which data must be retained by each service.
Could you list them, in english?
greetings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Olaf Selke wrote:
> Eugen Leitl wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 08:14:34PM +0100, Olaf Selke wrote:
>>
>>> nothing will change for German tor operators due to this law. It defines
>>> how to store and how to hand over stored data to the authorities.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Eugen Leitl wrote:
> Don't waste your time. Let's see what Karlsruhe says first.
> And since we're talking laws, look at GG Par. 20, Abs. 4.
Well, we arent that far yet. First we have to do 17 petition runs.
And appeal to the Bundespraesident.
Wonder
Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 08:14:34PM +0100, Olaf Selke wrote:
>
>> nothing will change for German tor operators due to this law. It defines
>> how to store and how to hand over stored data to the authorities. Data
>> not collected at all can't be stored, right?. But this law doe
Alexander Bernhard kirjoitti:
They will not just ask you for the logfiles. YOU will have to find out which
ip-address was routed on your server on a more-or-less specific timewindow
in the last 6 month and with which ip-address the data was forwarded to the
next router.
If you can not provide th
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 08:14:34PM +0100, Olaf Selke wrote:
> nothing will change for German tor operators due to this law. It defines
> how to store and how to hand over stored data to the authorities. Data
> not collected at all can't be stored, right?. But this law does not
> enforce tor operat
Am Samstag, 10. November 2007 schrieb Christoph:
> >I assume that they made sure to put one, or more, "make
> > available to the state" cause in there?
>
> Of course !
>
> >If not, I'm just wondering how they'd react if I do log (as
> > required), and if they want the logs, I send them a
>
>
>I assume that they made sure to put one, or more, "make available to
> the state" cause in there?
Of course !
>
>If not, I'm just wondering how they'd react if I do log (as
> required), and if they want the logs, I send them a
> tor.20080101-20100101.logs.tar.bz.gpg.good_luck.
German:
Our measurement for space of log data:
(because there was a question for it)
server traffic (mean): 2.000 KB/s
log data for one week: 200 GByte
after remove of some useless strings: 120 GByte
compressed and encrypted: 20 GByte
for 26 weeks: approx. 500 GByte
This is very much for our s
ember 10, 2007 12:59 PM
To: or-talk@freehaven.net
Subject: Re: 20090101
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Max Berger wrote:
[---]
> As far as I see in the new §113a TKG [*] we don't have to log the whole
> circuit data. We just have to log, which nodes connect to our node
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Max Berger wrote:
[---]
> As far as I see in the new §113a TKG [*] we don't have to log the whole
> circuit data. We just have to log, which nodes connect to our node and
> which IP-address we give this connection (that's the IP-address of our
> own
Am Freitag, den 09.11.2007, 16:25 +0100 schrieb Eugen Leitl:
>
> No, there's a clemency period until 20090101. Whether you want to
> log afterwards, or shut down your node is every operator's personal
> decision.
>
Does anyone have an idea of the size of these log files? I try to
estimate how ma
Am Freitag, 9. November 2007 schrieb Eugen Leitl:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 07:42:46PM +0100, Valen MacLeod wrote:
> >Heisst das jetzt, dass ich das protokollieren muss, wenn ich
> > einen TORserver betreiben will?
>
> Not yet. A lot of things can and will change until 1. January 2009,
> and I
On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 07:42:46PM +0100, Valen MacLeod wrote:
>Heisst das jetzt, dass ich das protokollieren muss, wenn ich einen
>TORserver betreiben will?
Not yet. A lot of things can and will change until 1. January 2009,
and I would definitely look for an official legal interpretatio
Eugen Leitl schrieb:
On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 04:47:11PM +0100, Olaf Selke wrote:
which paragraph are you referring to? §113a TKG doesn't require to collect any
data. It just
requires to store already collected data for at least six months:
§113a TKG
"Wer öffentlich zugängliche Telekom
On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 04:47:11PM +0100, Olaf Selke wrote:
> which paragraph are you referring to? §113a TKG doesn't require to collect
> any data. It just
> requires to store already collected data for at least six months:
>
> §113a TKG
> "Wer öffentlich zugängliche Telekommunikationsdiens
Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 04:20:00PM +0100, Olaf Selke wrote:
>
>> nope, from my understanding this is not the case. Telco operators are
>> required to store data
>> they already collect, for a certain period of time. But this law doesn't
>> require to collect
>> any data at a
On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 04:20:00PM +0100, Olaf Selke wrote:
> nope, from my understanding this is not the case. Telco operators are
> required to store data
> they already collect, for a certain period of time. But this law doesn't
> require to collect
> any data at all. So for German Tor operat
On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 04:13:46PM +0100, Peter Kornherr wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 03:59:44PM CET, you (Eugen Leitl) wrote:
>
> > This will be contested as unconstitutional, but in cases it
> > will become law all Tor operators are required by law to start
> > logging 20090101.
>
> 200801
Eugen Leitl wrote:
>
> This will be contested as unconstitutional, but in cases it
> will become law all Tor operators are required by law to start
> logging 20090101.
nope, from my understanding this is not the case. Telco operators are required
to store data
they already collect, for a certai
On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 03:59:44PM CET, you (Eugen Leitl) wrote:
> This will be contested as unconstitutional, but in cases it
> will become law all Tor operators are required by law to start
> logging 20090101.
20080101 :(
49 matches
Mail list logo