- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's
by SiNA Rabbani 02 Jan '15

02 Jan '15

There was a new line added to authority director configs, which was a response to the recent Sybil attack [1]: MinUptimeHidServDirectoryV2 96 hours That's only 4 days, I wonder if anything else has changed. --SiNA [1] https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-consensus-health/2014-December/0… "Be the change that you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi ----- On Jan 2, 2015, at 2:51 PM, Sebastian G. <bastik.tor> bastik.tor(a)googlemail.com wrote: > 02.01.2015, 19:47 Kura: >> I think something must have happened, I restarted half a dozen or so >> of my relays over a week ago and none of them have been given the >> HSDir flag, which if I remember rightly is a 21 hour flag? I may be >> mistaken but, I would have expected that flag to be back with over a >> week of uptime. > > It used to be a 25 hour flag. 1 day plus an additional hour. > > I think (yes, that says I don't know) the period being longer than 24 > hours had something to do with an attack to get relays under adversary > control in the right position to become a HSDir for some > hidden-services. If one pays for a relays by days an additional hour is > an additional day for an attacker. > > I may have missed something, but maybe it was raised. > > I do remember that changes to Guards took place, like requiring them to > have more bandwidth and to reducing the number of Guards clients would > use. This was due to research. > > Regards, > Sebastian > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by bigbudtor＠Safe-mail.net 02 Jan '15

02 Jan '15

Thanks Sebastian, That explains the loss of guard status back in August at least. I totally missed that announcement. Back to the main issue, it does look like one or two others at least are having this problem. Is it simply as a result of being in a Lizard-blacklisted netblock? Bigbud is in 85.119.0.0/16. Is the current Lizard-blacklist published or is it only known to the directory authorities? thanks BB > Hi, > Found the snippet with the changes for the guards: > Tor Weekly News, 30th of July 2014 > Once directory authorities have upgraded, they will “assign the Guard flag > to the fastest 25% of the network”. Some experiments showed that “for the > current network, this results in about 1100 guards, down from 2500.” > > -- > Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations > > Sebastian Urbach

2 1

Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by Sebastian Urbach 02 Jan '15

02 Jan '15

Hi, Found the snippet with the changes for the guards: Tor Weekly News, 30th of July 2014 Once directory authorities have upgraded, they will “assign the Guard flag to the fastest 25% of the network”. Some experiments showed that “for the current network, this results in about 1100 guards, down from 2500.” -- Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations Sebastian Urbach ----------------------------------------- Definition of Tor: 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and 100% reason to remember the name! -----------------------------------------

1 0

Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20
by bigbudtor＠Safe-mail.net 02 Jan '15

02 Jan '15

On the 29th December one of our relays, bigbud (6911888F83565892FE23F1B03EB501D80E1E8780) which had a consensus of 630+ and had been running for nearly 18 months (100 days uptime running 2.5.8) suddenly started receiving much less traffic. I have seen a gradual reduction in traffic over the course of the last year but on the 29th the drop off was very significant and I saw in Atlas that the consensus is dropped to 20. When I look at the consensus files it shows that bigbud has a consensus of 20 and that Unmeasured was set to 1. Any ideas please? I upgraded Tor to 2.5.10 after I noticed the consensus drop. Is this something to do with the Lizard new relay flood or something or is there an actual problem with the relay? On a related note the relay lost guard status too a few months ago and I couldn't see why that would be.

3 2

Re: [tor-relays] sudden drop
by Spencer Rhodes 02 Jan '15

02 Jan '15

Not sure if related, but I noticed today one of my exit relays was not operating properly. Turned out the bind server was not resolving properly. I turned off dnssec and it started working again... On January 2, 2015 6:45:30 PM EST, tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org wrote: >Send tor-relays mailing list submissions to > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > tor-relays-request(a)lists.torproject.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at > tor-relays-owner(a)lists.torproject.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of tor-relays digest..." > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Reduced number of HSDir's (Sebastian Urbach) > 2. Re: Reduced number of HSDir's (Austin Bentley) > 3. Re: Reduced number of HSDir's (Kura) > 4. Re: Reduced number of HSDir's (Sebastian G. <bastik.tor>) > 5. Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20 > (bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net) > 6. Re: Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back to 20 (s7r) > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: Sebastian Urbach <sebastian(a)urbach.org> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 12:25:06 EST 2015 >Subject: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >Hi, > >https://metrics.torproject.org shows a big nose dive recently regarding >the >number of HSDir's. Did i miss anything relevant in the last days ? That > >seem to be the reason why i see increasing download numbers on my >system. > >Thanks for any lind of info. >-- >Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations > >Sebastian Urbach > >----------------------------------------- >Definition of Tor: >10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated >power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and >100% reason to remember the name! >----------------------------------------- > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: Austin Bentley <ab6d9(a)mst.edu> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 13:29:33 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >No clue. I wonder if there's some backlash from a anti-attack mechanism >of >some sort? There was a few attempted attacks against the Tor network, >but >it wasn't anything worth discussing. Check out the post on the 31st >from >blog.torproject.org. > >On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Sebastian Urbach ><sebastian(a)urbach.org> >wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> https://metrics.torproject.org shows a big nose dive recently >regarding >> the number of HSDir's. Did i miss anything relevant in the last days >? That >> seem to be the reason why i see increasing download numbers on my >system. >> >> Thanks for any lind of info. >> -- >> Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations >> >> Sebastian Urbach >> >> ----------------------------------------- >> Definition of Tor: >> 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated >> power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and >> 100% reason to remember the name! >> ----------------------------------------- >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> tor-relays mailing list >> tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >> > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: Kura <kura(a)kura.io> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 13:47:51 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >I think something must have happened, I restarted half a dozen or so of >my relays over a week ago and none of them have been given the >HSDir flag, which if I remember rightly is a 21 hour flag? I may be >mistaken but, I would have expected that flag to be back with over a >week of uptime. > > >-- >Kura > >t: @kuramanga [https://twitter.com/kuramanga] >w: https://kura.io/ [https://kura.io/] >g: @kura [http://git.io/kura] >On 02/01/2015 18:30:00, Austin Bentley <ab6d9(a)mst.edu> wrote: >No clue. I wonder if there's some backlash from a anti-attack mechanism >of some sort? There was a few attempted attacks against the Tor >network, but it wasn't anything worth discussing. Check out the post on >the 31st from blog.torproject.org [http://blog.torproject.org] > > >On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Sebastian Urbach <sebastian(a)urbach.org >[mailto:sebastian@urbach.org]> wrote: > >Hi, > >https://metrics.torproject.org [https://metrics.torproject.org] shows a >big nose dive recently regarding the number of HSDir's. Did i miss >anything relevant in the last days ? That seem to be the reason why i >see increasing download numbers on my system. > >Thanks for any lind of info. >-- >Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations > >Sebastian Urbach > >----------------------------------------- >Definition of Tor: >10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated >power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and >100% reason to remember the name! >----------------------------------------- > > >_______________________________________________ >tor-relays mailing list >tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >[mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org] >https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >[https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays] > > >_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list >tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: "Sebastian G. <bastik.tor>" <bastik.tor(a)googlemail.com> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 14:51:26 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Reduced number of HSDir's > >02.01.2015, 19:47 Kura: >> I think something must have happened, I restarted half a dozen or so >> of my relays over a week ago and none of them have been given the >> HSDir flag, which if I remember rightly is a 21 hour flag? I may be >> mistaken but, I would have expected that flag to be back with over a >> week of uptime. > >It used to be a 25 hour flag. 1 day plus an additional hour. > >I think (yes, that says I don't know) the period being longer than 24 >hours had something to do with an attack to get relays under adversary >control in the right position to become a HSDir for some >hidden-services. If one pays for a relays by days an additional hour is >an additional day for an attacker. > >I may have missed something, but maybe it was raised. > >I do remember that changes to Guards took place, like requiring them to >have more bandwidth and to reducing the number of Guards clients would >use. This was due to research. > >Regards, >Sebastian > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 18:28:48 EST 2015 >Subject: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped back >to 20 > >On the 29th December one of our relays, bigbud >(6911888F83565892FE23F1B03EB501D80E1E8780) which had a consensus of >630+ and had been running for nearly 18 months (100 days uptime running >2.5.8) suddenly started receiving much less traffic. > >I have seen a gradual reduction in traffic over the course of the last >year but on the 29th the drop off was very significant and I saw in >Atlas that the consensus is dropped to 20. When I look at the consensus >files it shows that bigbud has a consensus of 20 and that Unmeasured >was set to 1. > >Any ideas please? I upgraded Tor to 2.5.10 after I noticed the >consensus drop. Is this something to do with the Lizard new relay flood >or something or is there an actual problem with the relay? > >On a related note the relay lost guard status too a few months ago and >I couldn't see why that would be. > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >From: s7r <s7r(a)sky-ip.org> >To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >Sent: Fri Jan 02 18:39:52 EST 2015 >Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Help - My relay consensus has been stripped >back to 20 > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >This was reported yesterday 01.01.2015 in IRC too, for this relay: > >3D7E274A87D9A89AF064C13D1EE4CA1F184F2600 > >The same it was pushing good amounts of traffic and the consensus >weight dropped to 20 with no modifications made to the Tor config file >or anything. You are the 3rd person who reports this, seams like worth >investigating further. > >I can see both of them are exits, but doubt this has anything to do >with it. > >Could it be a measurement problem from the bandwidth authorities? Why >would it happen only to very few relays in this case? > >On 1/3/2015 1:28 AM, bigbudtor(a)Safe-mail.net wrote: >> On the 29th December one of our relays, bigbud >> (6911888F83565892FE23F1B03EB501D80E1E8780) which had a consensus of >> 630+ and had been running for nearly 18 months (100 days uptime >> running 2.5.8) suddenly started receiving much less traffic. >> >> I have seen a gradual reduction in traffic over the course of the >> last year but on the 29th the drop off was very significant and I >> saw in Atlas that the consensus is dropped to 20. When I look at >> the consensus files it shows that bigbud has a consensus of 20 and >> that Unmeasured was set to 1. >> >> Any ideas please? I upgraded Tor to 2.5.10 after I noticed the >> consensus drop. Is this something to do with the Lizard new relay >> flood or something or is there an actual problem with the relay? >> >> On a related note the relay lost guard status too a few months ago >> and I couldn't see why that would be. >> _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing >> list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays >> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) > >iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUpyxIAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRB6MH+wWzDQPlhf+H4KWkoX9J6jhc >GQbL3+YmmZP1Eh941hnE6zaHpk5OUZiDarovBxSdL0FPEyHWlvLJIsFR6VXmfq2s >RB4hId21mKR5HQLNy/at6KP4Xs7dv3Qyid/KCZK3qH82HtJ9Yt9lA6yNTT8uLWmV >zIr1SKAMltBiIVrBWZaNGtqy5NVrGiF3yx2VYuHT7ZORL1l8BVjvG2I9d+/n2n7r >3RdEUKXSeFp/UnLlN5M9ZhHEdQLkioKfUisnkHdPKu7LTvWlVIONCm0t5lHo62xh >MUmbBP+lrWMfmQE8sJaTgmlJKq26Gb+JtG7uXV8k+XOfDokQygnFclJwZtUnKrQ= >=9kZo >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >tor-relays mailing list >tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays -- Sent from my phone.

1 0

Reduced number of HSDir's
by Sebastian Urbach 02 Jan '15

02 Jan '15

Hi, https://metrics.torproject.org shows a big nose dive recently regarding the number of HSDir's. Did i miss anything relevant in the last days ? That seem to be the reason why i see increasing download numbers on my system. Thanks for any lind of info. -- Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations Sebastian Urbach ----------------------------------------- Definition of Tor: 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and 100% reason to remember the name! -----------------------------------------

4 3

RPM upgrade issue.
by Sascha Siekmann 01 Jan '15

01 Jan '15

Hello, Happy New Year, everone! I've been chasing this down here for the last hour or so and I thought I might as well share it since others might also experience it. I am running https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/plutonium After running yum update this lead to a different fingerprint being generated for the same host. Nov 29 01:09:27 Installed: tor-0.2.5.10-tor.2.rh6_5.i686 Dec 29 19:21:07 Installed: torsocks-2.0.0-2.el6.i686 Dec 29 19:21:10 Updated: tor-0.2.5.10-1.el6.i686 Then, traffic collapsed by going down from <> 8MB/sec to pretty much nothing. I checked the logs and found permission errors. The group for Tor was changed from _tor to toranon, so the permissions were wrong after the rpm was installed. Also, /etc/tor/torrc had this line commented : ## The directory for keeping all the keys/etc. By default, we store ## things in $HOME/.tor on Unix, and in Application Data\tor on Windows. DataDirectory /var/lib/tor So it was defaulting to ~tor directory, tor/tor.log-20141230:Dec 30 03:13:01.000 [warn] Default DataDirectory is "~/.tor". This expands to "/.tor", which is probably not what you want. Using "/var/tor" instead [root@plutonium log]# rpm -qa | grep tor torsocks-2.0.0-2.el6.i686 tor-0.2.5.10-1.el6.i686 [root@plutonium log]# Dec 29 17:56:47.000 [notice] Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 25 days 0:00 hours, with 1885 circuits open. I've sent 6843.34 GB and received 6761.80 GB. Dec 29 17:56:47.000 [notice] Average packaged cell fullness: 97.313% Dec 29 17:56:47.000 [notice] TLS write overhead: 2% Dec 29 17:56:47.000 [notice] Circuit handshake stats since last time: 16007/16007 TAP, 49264/49264 NTor. Dec 29 20:07:10.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdesc-consensus.tmp" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdesc-consensus) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:07:10.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:07:10.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:07:11.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:07:11.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:08:10.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:08:10.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:08:10.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:08:10.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:09:11.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:09:11.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:09:11.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:09:11.000 [warn] Couldn't append to journal in /var/lib/tor/cached-microdescs.new: Permission denied Dec 29 20:29:31.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-consensus.tmp" (/var/lib/tor/cached-consensus) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:29:32.000 [warn] Couldn't open "/var/lib/tor/cached-descriptors.new" (/var/lib/tor/cached-descriptors.new) for writing: Permission denied Dec 29 20:29:32.000 [warn] Unable to store router descriptor I fixed the permissions, but I am seeing this message now that I have not seen before. Jan 1 21:36:02 p15186978 Tor[28986]: Invalid result from curve25519 handshake: 4 Jan 1 21:36:02 p15186978 Tor[28986]: onion_skin_client_handshake failed. Jan 1 21:36:02 p15186978 Tor[28986]: circuit_finish_handshake failed. Jan 1 21:36:02 p15186978 Tor[28986]: connection_edge_process_relay_cell (at origin) failed. Jan 1 21:36:04 p15186978 Tor[28986]: Performing bandwidth self-test...done. Should I be concerned about this message? [root@plutonium etc]# uname -a Linux plutonium 2.6.32-431.el6.i686 #1 SMP Fri Nov 22 00:26:36 UTC 2013 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux [root@plutonium etc]# cat /etc/redhat-release CentOS release 6.6 (Final) [root@plutonium etc]# Thanks, Sascha.

2 1

Relay is down
by Giovanny Andres Gongora Granada 01 Jan '15

01 Jan '15

Hi, My relay was up during 4 days, but now it's down. In the log it says: Dec 30 21:19:51.000 [warn] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '128.31.0.39:9131'. Please$ Dec 30 21:19:51.000 [warn] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '208.83.223.34:443'. Pleas$ Dec 30 21:19:51.000 [warn] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '131.188.40.189:80'. Pleas$ Dec 30 21:19:51.000 [warn] http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '86.59.21.38:80'. Please c$ What could be happening? I restart it but it says the same on the log. Regards, Gio -- Mozilla Hispano: http://mozilla-hispano.org Mentor en mozilla-hispano.org: Gioyik <https://www.mozilla-hispano.org/documentacion/Usuario:Gioyik> Mozilla Colombia: Miembro en MozillaColombia <http://mozillacolombia.org/our-contributors/> twitter: Gioyik <https://twitter.com/Gioyik> Blog: gioyik.wordpress.com irc: gioyik

8 11

OT: folding@home
by Sebastian Urbach 28 Dec '14

28 Dec '14

Dear list members, I would like to invite any operator, who has some idle Cores (CPU or GPU) left,to join the folding@home distributed computing project: http://folding.stanford.edu/ There is now a brandnew team called Tor Project (Unofficial) with the id 227615. Hope to see some of you there :-) -- Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations Sebastian Urbach ----------------------------------------- Definition of Tor: 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and 100% reason to remember the name! -----------------------------------------

6 10

boost CPU on a Tor relay
by s7r 28 Dec '14

28 Dec '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, A Tor relay currently going 33MB/s could go a lot faster but CPU is at 93% usage - this is the bottleneck. Here is the output of /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 26 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz stepping : 5 microcode : 0x11 cpu MHz : 3068.000 cache size : 8192 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 8 core id : 0 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 0 initial apicid : 0 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 11 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx rdtscp lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm ida dtherm tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept vpid bogomips : 6132.24 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: it also goes down to processor 1 - processor 7 Any ideas how this could be boosted? OS is Debian wheezy. No aes-ni hardware acceleration, no openssl benchmarking or customization currently. advices? Thank you. - -- s7r PGP Fingerprint: 7C36 9232 5ABD FB0B 3021 03F1 837F A52C 8126 5B11 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUDuRTAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRLqYH/iSCtC9r/7/DBCG2qqUGPEgY TELvt+UMGyMP6ncNJH+vDEdHO4BBlSMzFQdj2sKyO3hOT5492cIOaT3gGokaDApL W913yqUkIfiUT6FUWJ6g4/LUt25pMG25Ednr/ZJJXR/pR+Ym3T3ytg+MSwRBmpEe +h26Q7qvd/p4f6VhTR0sEsxQfDLVXrEsj3kn0BL0rLklN5zH/bqmIsK2hio5Nl3H KBvbvyt+JbLhA/4+jygT6AygHDH9arpXWEh3ZcJVn7mE0OmPAvukdlLUj70K5F7r cCeMakcGBbSzit5tY7jUmSvkUewVBhAxAZmv1hgNnuCoSrGPtQZseCbM06cry+k= =TyKF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

6 10