From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1V423b-0006IB-1j; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:01:11 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 74.125.82.177 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.177; envelope-from=rdohm321@gmail.com; helo=mail-we0-f177.google.com; Received: from mail-we0-f177.google.com ([74.125.82.177]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1V423Z-0002cA-98; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:01:11 +0000 Received: by mail-we0-f177.google.com with SMTP id m46so4633914wev.22 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 22:01:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.37.8 with SMTP id u8mr9218323wij.4.1375160462992; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 22:01:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.40.76 with HTTP; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 22:01:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 07:01:02 +0200 Message-ID: From: "Randolph D." To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net, bitcoin-list@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f647023e7edb704e2b37edf X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rdohm321[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit (rdohm321[at]gmail.com) 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1V423Z-0002cA-98 Subject: [Bitcoin-development] BitMail - p2p Email 0.1. beta X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:01:11 -0000 --e89a8f647023e7edb704e2b37edf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 http://bitmail.sourceforge.net/ - Secure P2P Email from Friend to Friend without relying on a central server. - Key- / Repleo-Exchange. - Full decentral Email-Network using the Echo Protocol. - Store Email for Offline-Friends in the P2P Network. - Chat and Instant Messaging is build in. Define & Add your friends. - Strong e2e Multi-Encryption (PGP-kind/AES over SSL: using libgcrypt). - Libspoton Integration. - Additional Security Layer with the GB-Feature for Emails. - Preventing Data Retention (VDS). WoT-less. - HTTP & HTTPS Connections. - Open Source. BSD License. anyone with a Server? Key? --e89a8f647023e7edb704e2b37edf Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=C2=A0
  • Secure P2P Email from Friend to Friend without relying = on a=20 central server.=20
  • Key- / Repleo-Exchange.=20
  • Full decentral Email-Network using the Echo Protocol.= =20
  • Store Email for Offline-Friends in the P2P Network.=20
  • Chat and Instant Messaging is build in. Define & Ad= d your=20 friends.=20
  • Strong e2e Multi-Encryption (PGP-kind/AES over SSL: usi= ng libgcrypt).=20
  • Libspoton Integration.=20
  • Additional Security Layer with the GB-Feature for Email= s.=20
  • Preventing Data Retention (VDS). WoT-less.=20
  • HTTP & HTTPS Connections.=20
  • Open Source. BSD License.
anyone with a Server? K= ey?
--e89a8f647023e7edb704e2b37edf-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1V43lF-0001qM-QL; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 06:50:21 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.215.52 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.52; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-la0-f52.google.com; Received: from mail-la0-f52.google.com ([209.85.215.52]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1V43lD-0005PI-RW; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 06:50:21 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f52.google.com with SMTP id fq13so3822148lab.25 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 23:50:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.74.47 with SMTP id q15mr27358273lbv.75.1375167012944; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 23:50:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.160.104 with HTTP; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 23:50:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 23:50:12 -0700 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net, bitcoin-list@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1V43lD-0005PI-RW Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BitMail - p2p Email 0.1. beta X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 06:50:22 -0000 On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:01 PM, Randolph D. wrote: > Secure P2P Email from Friend to Friend without relying on a central server. > Key- / Repleo-Exchange. > Full decentral Email-Network using the Echo Protocol. > Store Email for Offline-Friends in the P2P Network. > Chat and Instant Messaging is build in. Define & Add your friends. > Strong e2e Multi-Encryption (PGP-kind/AES over SSL: using libgcrypt). > Libspoton Integration. > Additional Security Layer with the GB-Feature for Emails. > Preventing Data Retention (VDS). WoT-less. > HTTP & HTTPS Connections. > Open Source. BSD License. > > anyone with a Server? Key? Keep safe everyone: A number of apparent sock accounts has been posting about what appears to be the same software under the name "goldbug" for a couple days now: e.g. https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2013-July/029107.html https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2013-July/029125.html http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2013-July/047137.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1V45UC-0000ds-M9; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:40:52 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.219.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.48; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f48.google.com; Received: from mail-oa0-f48.google.com ([209.85.219.48]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1V45UA-00067f-UQ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:40:52 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id f4so15627897oah.35 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 01:40:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.95.198 with SMTP id dm6mr61759608oeb.44.1375173645500; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 01:40:45 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.23.36 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 01:40:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 10:40:45 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0yrgTUQc-_dSdOfB3BA_bl7NLl0 Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Gregory Maxwell Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011606f4a5093d04e2b690f8 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1V45UA-00067f-UQ Cc: Bitcoin Dev , bitcoin-list@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BitMail - p2p Email 0.1. beta X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:40:53 -0000 --089e011606f4a5093d04e2b690f8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 For people who are interested in such technologies, I recommend looking at Pond: https://pond.imperialviolet.org/ It is written by Adam Langley, so it comes with some serious credentials behind it. It provides asynchronous email-like messaging that's forward secure, resistant to traffic analysis and the whole thing runs over Tor. Messages are stored for a week and are strictly limited in size. There's no spam because nobody has an address - instead you have to grant someone the ability to message you by giving them a small file. So, not really intended as an email competitor convenience wise, but it has many interesting ideas and a reasonable GUI. As a testament to the seriousness with which Pond takes forward security, it can use the NVRAM in a TPM chip to reliably destroy keys for data that an SSD device might have otherwise made un-erasable. The main downside - it's written in Go :) On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:01 PM, Randolph D. wrote: > > Secure P2P Email from Friend to Friend without relying on a central > server. > > Key- / Repleo-Exchange. > > Full decentral Email-Network using the Echo Protocol. > > Store Email for Offline-Friends in the P2P Network. > > Chat and Instant Messaging is build in. Define & Add your friends. > > Strong e2e Multi-Encryption (PGP-kind/AES over SSL: using libgcrypt). > > Libspoton Integration. > > Additional Security Layer with the GB-Feature for Emails. > > Preventing Data Retention (VDS). WoT-less. > > HTTP & HTTPS Connections. > > Open Source. BSD License. > > > > anyone with a Server? Key? > > Keep safe everyone: > > A number of apparent sock accounts has been posting about what appears > to be the same software under the name "goldbug" for a couple days > now: > > e.g. > https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2013-July/029107.html > https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2013-July/029125.html > http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2013-July/047137.html > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get your SQL database under version control now! > Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent > caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under > version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out. > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > --089e011606f4a5093d04e2b690f8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
For people who are interested in such technologies, I reco= mmend looking at Pond:


It is written by Adam Langley, so it comes with some serious credentials be= hind it. It provides asynchronous email-like messaging that's forward s= ecure, resistant to traffic analysis and the whole thing runs over Tor. Mes= sages are stored for a week and are strictly limited in size. There's n= o spam because nobody has an address - instead you have to grant someone th= e ability to message you by giving them a small file. So, not really intend= ed as an email competitor convenience wise, but it has many interesting ide= as and a reasonable GUI.=C2=A0

As a testament to the seriousness with which Pond takes= forward security, it can use the NVRAM in a TPM chip to reliably destroy k= eys for data that an SSD device might have otherwise made un-erasable.

The main downside - it's written in Go :)=C2=A0


On Tu= e, Jul 30, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>= wrote:
On M= on, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:01 PM, Randolph D. <rdohm321@gmail.com> wrote:
> Secure P2P Email from Friend to Friend without relying on a central se= rver.
> Key- / Repleo-Exchange.
> Full decentral Email-Network using the Echo Protocol.
> Store Email for Offline-Friends in the P2P Network.
> Chat and Instant Messaging is build in. Define & Add your friends.=
> Strong e2e Multi-Encryption (PGP-kind/AES over SSL: using libgcrypt).<= br> > Libspoton Integration.
> Additional Security Layer with the GB-Feature for Emails.
> Preventing Data Retention (VDS). WoT-less.
> HTTP & HTTPS Connections.
> Open Source. BSD License.
>
> anyone with a Server? Key?

Keep safe everyone:

A number of apparent sock accounts has been posting about what appears
to be the same software under the name "goldbug" for a couple day= s
now:

e.g.
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/20= 13-July/029107.html
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/20= 13-July/029125.html
http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2013-Jul= y/047137.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---
Get your SQL database under version control now!
Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gam= pad/clk?id=3D49501711&iu=3D/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-develo= pment@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de= velopment

--089e011606f4a5093d04e2b690f8-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1V48nR-00009w-RU; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:12:57 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.214.174 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.174; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f174.google.com; Received: from mail-ob0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1V48nQ-0002l9-K7; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:12:57 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f174.google.com with SMTP id wd6so8564891obb.5 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:12:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.141.36 with SMTP id rl4mr22637167oeb.43.1375186371203; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:12:51 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.23.36 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:12:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7B0891A4-7163-43AE-85EC-8BA7ADC28A2A@grabhive.com> References: <7B0891A4-7163-43AE-85EC-8BA7ADC28A2A@grabhive.com> Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 14:12:51 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Vj4C5FGRo-idaYbvDe2lu6iB400 Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Wendell Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b339fbf27d8c004e2b987c5 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1V48nQ-0002l9-K7 Cc: Bitcoin Dev , bitcoin-list@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BitMail - p2p Email 0.1. beta X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:12:58 -0000 --047d7b339fbf27d8c004e2b987c5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 The TPM is a piece of secure* hardware that provides various cryptographic services to the host system. It is important to understand that it is not a crypto accelerator. It is a place to store keys and small pieces of data (like hashes, counters) where it's difficult for someone to extract them even if they have physical access. The TPM is designed to support trusted computing, a rather splendid set of extensions to the x86 architecture that let you do remote attestation, software sealing and other things. Or at least it would be splendid if it had been really finished off and pushed to completion by the designers. Unfortunately due to various political issues it exists in a quasi-finished, semi-broken state which only experts can use. Without a doubt you have never run any software in a TC environment. As part of that role, the TPM provides some permanent storage in the form of NVRAM. Because the TPM is designed to be as cheap as possible, it has a limited number of write cycles. Normally you're meant to store Intel TXT launch control policies and sealed keys there, but Pond uses it in a different way by storing keys there that it encrypts local data with. By erasing the key in the TPM chips memory area, the data on disk is effectively destroyed too. This is useful because modern "disks" are often SSD drives, or physical metal disks that use log structured file systems. Because flash memory has a limited number of write cycles per cell, internally SSDs have firmware that remap writes from logical addresses to different physical addresses, the goal is to avoid wearing down the drive and extend its useful life. Normally it doesn't matter, but if you want to delete data such that it's really really gone, it obviously poses a problem. Using TPM NVRAM solves it, albiet, at a high usability cost. *note: actual tamper resistance of real-world TPM chips is not something that seems to have been studied much On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Wendell wrote: > Can you explain this process for those of us not too familiar with TPM > chips? > > -wendell > > grabhive.com | twitter.com/grabhive | gpg: 6C0C9411 > > On Jul 30, 2013, at 10:40 AM, Mike Hearn wrote: > > > As a testament to the seriousness with which Pond takes forward > security, it can use the NVRAM in a TPM chip to reliably destroy keys for > data that an SSD device might have otherwise made un-erasable. > --047d7b339fbf27d8c004e2b987c5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The TPM is a piece of secure* hardware that provides vario= us cryptographic services to the host system. It is important to understand= that it is not a crypto accelerator. It is a place to store keys and small= pieces of data (like hashes, counters) where it's difficult for someon= e to extract them even if they have physical access.

The TPM is designed to support trusted computing, a rather s= plendid set of extensions to the x86 architecture that let you do remote at= testation, software sealing and other things. Or at least it would be splen= did if it had been really finished off and pushed to completion by the desi= gners. Unfortunately due to various political issues it exists in a quasi-f= inished, semi-broken state which only experts can use. Without a doubt you = have never run any software in a TC environment.

As part of that role, the TPM provides some permanent s= torage in the form of NVRAM. Because the TPM is designed to be as cheap as = possible, it has a limited number of write cycles. Normally you're mean= t to store Intel TXT launch control policies and sealed keys there, but Pon= d uses it in a different way by storing keys there that it encrypts local d= ata with. By erasing the key in the TPM chips memory area, the data on disk= is effectively destroyed too.

This is useful because modern "disks" are oft= en SSD drives, or physical metal disks that use log structured file systems= . Because flash memory has a limited number of write cycles per cell, inter= nally SSDs have firmware that remap writes from logical addresses to differ= ent physical addresses, the goal is to avoid wearing down the drive and ext= end its useful life. Normally it doesn't matter, but if you want to del= ete data such that it's really really gone, it obviously poses a proble= m. Using TPM NVRAM solves it, albiet, at a high usability cost.



*note: actual tamper resi= stance of real-world TPM chips is not something that seems to have been stu= died much


On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Wendell <w@grabhive.com> wrote= :
Can you explain this process for those of us not too familiar with TPM chip= s?

-wendell

grabhive.com | twitter.com/grabhive | gpg: 6C0C9411

On Jul 30, 2013, at 10:40 AM, Mike Hearn wrote:

> As a testament to the seriousness with which Pond takes forward securi= ty, it can use the NVRAM in a TPM chip to reliably destroy keys for data th= at an SSD device might have otherwise made un-erasable.

--047d7b339fbf27d8c004e2b987c5-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1V48oE-0002IE-4n for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:13:46 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from mail-oa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.219.51]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1V48oC-0000nt-8Z for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:13:46 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id h2so3590260oag.24 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:13:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer :x-gm-message-state; bh=f8hKJjTe+qk5ITa/Zfh3VyQqJt5xwrEHctZ6UzQp+eY=; b=cSEaWxxgCTyS0T8VWZrmoJsADoyPlWjYUfoWjNsSmiEoX3CMYyXAmKuN/TSOVDqHMO FPzLgbXgUSbxrrteD8InEI8QXCBRT+zvEYDniOqZaFnx7pTENKV6XPELDMjDfp37edv0 oNgBA4pRDxoCl6CAlkHYP3wq0vwQK5n61jU6mSOjHHWcSXYjKB5mP0Z4cZwkhUi82TbJ 8hbA5j+2Y0JQByGVHZcVCzanpkSGtFV9k7JCqRJ4tP10In5Td6akOJ+gLjuBRW6Bsf3t 4eV0SdveRq2Q0I6rVDfi8SaYImNB1XwZlTSg9aiH/exZJSEzJLFILDmRQun61nV1dso0 gBGw== X-Received: by 10.60.123.10 with SMTP id lw10mr62855155oeb.102.1375184800590; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:46:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([199.101.135.198]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id mq1sm94867101obb.14.2013.07.30.04.46.27 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:46:40 -0700 (PDT) Sender: w grabhive Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Wendell In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 13:27:02 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7B0891A4-7163-43AE-85EC-8BA7ADC28A2A@grabhive.com> References: To: Mike Hearn X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm+xGd6fETXxoNXkQ3YnYvlB9BUPoedDyW4kRs0GHlClQXn4RzMr7H9sfXDQtP2LZzJndji X-Spam-Score: 2.7 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 1.5 RCVD_IN_PSBL RBL: Received via a relay in PSBL [199.101.135.198 listed in psbl.surriel.com] 1.2 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net [Blocked - see ] X-Headers-End: 1V48oC-0000nt-8Z Cc: Bitcoin Dev , bitcoin-list@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BitMail - p2p Email 0.1. beta X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:13:46 -0000 Can you explain this process for those of us not too familiar with TPM = chips? -wendell grabhive.com | twitter.com/grabhive | gpg: 6C0C9411 On Jul 30, 2013, at 10:40 AM, Mike Hearn wrote: > As a testament to the seriousness with which Pond takes forward = security, it can use the NVRAM in a TPM chip to reliably destroy keys = for data that an SSD device might have otherwise made un-erasable. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1V4IEq-0008KO-AR; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 22:17:52 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.219.43 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.43; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f43.google.com; Received: from mail-oa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.219.43]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1V4IEo-0008TH-DP; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 22:17:52 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id i10so12445769oag.30 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:17:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.56.232 with SMTP id d8mr4574001obq.96.1375222664991; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:17:44 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.23.36 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:17:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <7B0891A4-7163-43AE-85EC-8BA7ADC28A2A@grabhive.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 00:17:44 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0Ud0EAQEJVGGSqKWrFBix009Kbc Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: grarpamp Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2c91c6f19c104e2c1fa5b X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1V4IEo-0008TH-DP Cc: Bitcoin Dev , bitcoin-list@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [bitcoin-list] BitMail - p2p Email 0.1. beta X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 22:17:52 -0000 --001a11c2c91c6f19c104e2c1fa5b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 TPMs have come as standard with nearly all computers (except Macs, doh) for a long time. They certainly don't cost $100. More like a few dollars at most. That's why they're so slow. On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:43 PM, grarpamp wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Mike Hearn wrote: > > The TPM is a piece of secure* hardware > > I've seen some motherboards with a TPM module header but none > came with it installed. I think the modules themselves might be > $50-$100 range. They might come with some API docs. > Some of you might have links to ones you've used... > > > As part of that role, the TPM provides some permanent storage in the form > > of NVRAM. Because the TPM is designed to be as cheap as possible, it has > a > > limited number of write cycles. Normally you're meant to store Intel TXT > > launch control policies and sealed keys there > > > the goal is to avoid wearing down the drive and extend its useful life. > > Normally it doesn't matter, but if you want to delete data such that it's > > really really gone, it obviously poses a problem. Using TPM NVRAM solves > > it, albiet, at a high usability cost. > > If said TPM storage has a 'limited [but unfixed number of write cycles', > that > sounds unreliable. It would seem to me that both reliable and 'really gone' > are achievable on platters (or lesser, with ssd) provided the disk was also > encrypted. Nuke that key and it's reliably gone. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get your SQL database under version control now! > Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent > caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under > version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out. > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-list mailing list > bitcoin-list@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-list > --001a11c2c91c6f19c104e2c1fa5b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
TPMs have come as standard with nearly all computers (exce= pt Macs, doh) for a long time. They certainly don't cost $100. More lik= e a few dollars at most. That's why they're so slow.


On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:43 PM, grarpa= mp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> The TPM is a piece of secure* hardware

I've seen some motherboards with a TPM module header but none
came with it installed. I think the modules themselves might be
$50-$100 range. They might come with some API docs.
Some of you might have links to ones you've used...

> As part of that role, the TPM provides some permanent storage in the f= orm
> of NVRAM. Because the TPM is designed to be as cheap as possible, it h= as a
> limited number of write cycles. Normally you're meant to store Int= el TXT
> launch control policies and sealed keys there

> the goal is to avoid wearing down the drive an= d extend its useful life.
> Normally it doesn't matter, but if you want to delete data such th= at it's
> really really gone, it obviously poses a problem. Using TPM NVRAM solv= es
> it, albiet, at a high usability cost.

If said TPM storage has a 'limited [but unfixed number of write c= ycles', that
sounds unreliable. It would seem to me that both reliable and 'really g= one'
are achievable on platters (or lesser, with ssd) provided the disk was also=
encrypted. Nuke that key and it's reliably gone.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---
Get your SQL database under version control now!
Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gam= pad/clk?id=3D49501711&iu=3D/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-list mailing list
bitcoin-list@lists.so= urceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-list<= br>

--001a11c2c91c6f19c104e2c1fa5b-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1V4SOy-0001UI-3o; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:09:00 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.219.43 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.43; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f43.google.com; Received: from mail-oa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.219.43]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1V4SOw-0007Mz-Vx; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:09:00 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id i10so960817oag.2 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 02:08:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.143.35 with SMTP id sb3mr30897388oeb.62.1375261733350; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 02:08:53 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.23.36 with HTTP; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 02:08:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51F886F6.1090108@gmail.com> References: <7B0891A4-7163-43AE-85EC-8BA7ADC28A2A@grabhive.com> <51F886F6.1090108@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:08:53 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Hhzt3dhK29zufHKP_ewLZ4RKBsg Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Blibbet Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b4141bc16f7f204e2cb139e X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1V4SOw-0007Mz-Vx Cc: Bitcoin Dev , grarpamp , bitcoin-list@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [bitcoin-list] BitMail - p2p Email 0.1. beta X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:09:00 -0000 --047d7b4141bc16f7f204e2cb139e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 "Support" for a TPM is a rather tricky thing. By itself the TPM is independent of any CPU. However, it's also not very useful (though for Pond's use case, it works). The TPM gets much more useful when it's integrated with features on the motherboard, BIOS, CPU, northbridge, IOMMU etc. Then you have a full blown TCG-compliant TC environment, which is useful for many things. Actually it was never very useful for DRM - that was only one theoretical possibility that was never implemented and even if it had been, TC is to DRM much as cryptography is to DRM. So the FUD was just that: fear, uncertainty and doubt which probably crippled a highly useful cryptographic security tool for good. One of the more shameful periods of the tech industries history, if you ask me. On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 5:39 AM, Blibbet wrote: > On 7/30/13 3:58 PM, grarpamp wrote: > > [...] And if AMD even has this stuff. [...] > > Yes, AMD does have TPM. > > Sorry, not sure which models support it. > > http://www.amd.com/us/products/embedded/das/Pages/security.aspx > > > http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/platforms/Pages/desktop-platforms.aspx > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get your SQL database under version control now! > Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent > caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under > version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out. > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-list mailing list > bitcoin-list@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-list > --047d7b4141bc16f7f204e2cb139e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
"Support" for a TPM is a rather tricky thing.
By itself the TPM is independent of any CPU. However, it&#= 39;s also not very useful (though for Pond's use case, it works).

The TPM gets much more useful when it's integrated = with features on the motherboard, BIOS, CPU, northbridge, IOMMU etc. Then y= ou have a full blown TCG-compliant TC environment, which is useful for many= things. Actually it was never very useful for DRM - that was only one theo= retical possibility that was never implemented and even if it had been, TC = is to DRM much as cryptography is to DRM. So the FUD was just that: fear, u= ncertainty and doubt which probably crippled a highly useful cryptographic = security tool for good. One of the more shameful periods of the tech indust= ries history, if you ask me.



On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 5:39 AM, Blibbet <blibbet@gmail.com>= ; wrote:
On 7/30/13 3:58 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> [...] And if AMD even has this stuff. =C2=A0[...]

Yes, AMD does have TPM.

Sorry, not sure which models support it.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/embedded/das/Pages/securi= ty.aspx

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/pla= tforms/Pages/desktop-platforms.aspx


---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---
Get your SQL database under version control now!
Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gam= pad/clk?id=3D49501711&iu=3D/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-list mailing list
bitcoin-list@lists.so= urceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-list<= br>

--047d7b4141bc16f7f204e2cb139e-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1V4YjL-0006aR-04 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:54:27 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.219.53 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.53; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f53.google.com; Received: from mail-oa0-f53.google.com ([209.85.219.53]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1V4YjK-0008AH-5h for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:54:26 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id k18so946687oag.40 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:54:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.56.232 with SMTP id d8mr7336260obq.96.1375286060803; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:54:20 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.23.36 with HTTP; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:54:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <7B0891A4-7163-43AE-85EC-8BA7ADC28A2A@grabhive.com> <51F886F6.1090108@gmail.com> <20130731133104.GW29404@leitl.org> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 17:54:20 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: liwmZtMhWXz4xqjcI8IP7BOj1Xs Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Eugen Leitl Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2c91c1e6e5d04e2d0bd0d X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1V4YjK-0008AH-5h Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [bitcoin-list] BitMail - p2p Email 0.1. beta X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:54:27 -0000 --001a11c2c91c1e6e5d04e2d0bd0d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sorry, I just noticed that this thread was CCd to the announce list not the development list (why is it open access?) It's offtopic anyway. Let's continue this discussion in private if anyone wants to. On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Mike Hearn wrote: > > The reason why TPM functionality was so much hated upon is because >> it was pushed by a software/hardware monopoly, not just for DRM but >> for locking down the system in general. >> > > Regardless of what some people might have imagined or extrapolated at the > time, the actual published specifications and technologies were nothing > like that. There has never been a TC/TPM mode that would have generally > locked systems down or even been useful for DRM (that'd have required a > trusted hardware path which was never specced nor implemented). > > Locking a system down against tampering or for DRM does not require > flexible open specifications with multiple competing implementations. It > requires you to do an Xbox 360. > --001a11c2c91c1e6e5d04e2d0bd0d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sorry, I just noticed that this thread was CCd to the anno= unce list not the development list (why is it open access?)

<= div>It's offtopic anyway. Let's continue this discussion in private= if anyone wants to.


On Wed,= Jul 31, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:<= br>

=
The reason why TPM functio= nality was so much hated upon is because
it was pushed by a software/hardware monopoly, not just for DRM but
for locking down the system in general.

Regardless of what some people might have imagined or extrapolated a= t the time, the actual published specifications and technologies were nothi= ng like that. There has never been a TC/TPM mode that would have generally = locked systems down or even been useful for DRM (that'd have required a= trusted hardware path which was never specced nor implemented).=C2=A0

Locking a system down against tampering or for DRM does= not require flexible open specifications with multiple competing implement= ations. It requires you to do an Xbox 360.

--001a11c2c91c1e6e5d04e2d0bd0d-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1V4Yzz-0006Iz-J9; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:11:39 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.212.178 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.178; envelope-from=rdohm321@gmail.com; helo=mail-wi0-f178.google.com; Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com ([209.85.212.178]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1V4Yzy-0002Cr-PJ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:11:39 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f178.google.com with SMTP id j17so848183wiw.17 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:11:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.12.243 with SMTP id b19mr4801526wic.6.1375287092498; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.40.76 with HTTP; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:11:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <7B0891A4-7163-43AE-85EC-8BA7ADC28A2A@grabhive.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 18:11:32 +0200 Message-ID: From: "Randolph D." To: Mike Hearn Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c351ac9cd5bd04e2d0fac8 X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rdohm321[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit (rdohm321[at]gmail.com) 0.0 NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP URI: Uses a dotted-decimal IP address in URL 0.0 WEIRD_PORT URI: Uses non-standard port number for HTTP 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1V4Yzy-0002Cr-PJ Cc: Bitcoin Dev , bitcoin-list@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BitMail - p2p Email 0.1. beta X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:11:40 -0000 --001a11c351ac9cd5bd04e2d0fac8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 right the original Topic was BitMail here a Server running for the next few days to test BitMail.sf.net 178.83.35.133:4710 --001a11c351ac9cd5bd04e2d0fac8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
right the original Topic was BitMail
here a Server running f= or the next few days to test BitMail.sf.n= et
=C2=A0
--001a11c351ac9cd5bd04e2d0fac8--