Anonymous edits in Hellenic Wikipedia from Hellenic Parliament IPs

Inspired from another project called “Anonymous Wikipedia edits from the Norwegian parliament and government offices” I decided to create something similar for the Hellenic Parliament.

I downloaded the XML dumps (elwiki-20140702-pages-meta-history.xml.7z) for the elwiki from The compressed file is less than 600Mb but uncompressing it leads to a 73Gb XML which contains the full history of edits. Then I modified a parser I found on this blog to extract the data I wanted: Page Title, Timestamp and IP.

Then it was easy to create a list that contains all the edits that have been created by Hellenic Parliament IPs ( throughout the History of Hellenic Wikipedia:
The list

Interesting edits

  1. Former Prime Minister “Κωνσταντίνος Σημίτης”
    An IP from inside the Hellenic Parliament tried to remove the following text at least 3 times in 17-18/02/2014. This is a link to the first edit: Diff 1.

    Για την περίοδο 1996-2001 ξοδεύτηκαν 5,2 τρις δρχ σε εξοπλισμούς. Οι δαπάνες του Β` ΕΜΠΑΕ (2001-2006) υπολογίζεται πως έφτασαν τα 6 με 7 τρις δρχ.[ ”To κόστος των εξοπλισμών”], εφημερίδα ”Ελευθεροτυπία”, δημοσίευση [[1 Αυγούστου]] [[2001]].Έπειτα απο τη σύλληψη και ενοχή του Γ.Καντά,υπάρχουν υπόνοιες για την εμπλοκή του στο σκάνδαλο με μίζες από Γερμανικές εταιρίες στα εξοπλιστικά,κάτι το οποίο διερευνάται απο την Εισαγγελία της Βρέμης.

  2. Former MP “Δημήτρης Κωνσταντάρας”
    Someone modified his biography twice. Diff Links: Diff 1 Diff 2.
  3. Former football player “Δημήτρης Σαραβάκος”
    In the following edit someone updated this player’s bio adding that he ‘currently plays in porn films’. Diff link. The same editor seems to have removed that reference later, diff link.
  4. Former MP “Θεόδωρος Ρουσόπουλος”
    Someone wanted to update this MP’s bio and remove some reference of a scandal. Diff link.
  5. The movie “Ραντεβού με μια άγνωστη”
    Claiming that the nude scenes are probably not from the actor named “Έλενα Ναθαναήλ”. Diff link.
  6. The soap opera “Χίλιες και Μία Νύχτες (σειρά)”
    Someone created the first version of the article on this soap opera. Diff Link.
  7. Politician “Γιάννης Λαγουδάκος”
    Someone edited his bio so it seemed that he would run for MP with the political party called “Ανεξάρτητοι Έλληνες”. Diff Link
  8. University professor “Γεώργιος Γαρδίκας”
    Someone edited his profile and added a link for amateur football team “Αγιαξ Αιγάλεω”. Diff Link.
  9. Politician “Λευτέρης Αυγενάκης”
    Someone wanted to fix his bio and upload a file, so he/she added a link from the local computer “C:\Documents and Settings\user2\Local Settings\Temp\ΑΥΓΕΝΑΚΗΣ”. Diff link.
  10. MP “Κώστας Μαρκόπουλος”
    Someone wanted to fix his bio regarding his return to the “Νέα Δημοκρατία” political party. Diff Link.
  11. (Golden Dawn) MP “Νίκος Μιχαλολιάκος”
    Someone was trying to “fix” his bio removing some accusations. Diff Link.
  12. (Golden Dawn) MP “Ηλίας Κασιδιάρης”
    Someone was trying to fix his bio and remove various accusations and incidents. Diff Link 1, Diff Link 2, Diff Link 3.

Who’s done the edits ?
The IP range of the Hellenic Parliament is not only used by MPs but from people working in the parliament as well. Don’t rush to any conclusions…
Oh, and the IP is probably a proxy inside the Parliament.

Threat Model
Not that it matters a lot for MPs and politicians in general, but it’s quite interesting that if someone “anonymously” edits a wikipedia article, wikimedia stores the IP of the editor and provides it to anyone that wants to download the wiki archives. If the IP range is known, or someone has the legal authority within a country to force an ISP to reveal the owner of an IP, it is quite easy to spot the actual person behind an “anonymous” edit. But if someone creates an account to edit wikipedia articles, wikimedia does not publish the IPs of its users, the account database is private. To get an IP of a user, one would need to take wikimedia to courts to force them to reveal that account’s IP address. Since every wikipedia article edit history is available for anyone to download, one is actually “more anonymous to the public” if he/she logs in or creates a (new) account every time before editing an article, than editing the same article without an account. Unless someone is afraid that wikimedia will leak/disclose their account’s IPs.
So depending on their threat model, people can choose whether they want to create (new) account(s) before editing an article or not :)

Similar Projects

  • Parliament WikiEdits
  • congress-edits
  • Riksdagen redigerar
  • Stortinget redigerer
  • AussieParl WikiEdits
  • anon
  • Bonus
    Anonymous edit from “Synaspismos Political Party” (ΣΥΡΙΖΑ) address range for “Δημοκρατική Αριστερά” political party article, changing it’s youth party blog link to the PASOK youth party blog link. Diff Link

    SMTP over Hidden Services with postfix

    More and more privacy experts are nowdays calling people to move away from the email service provider giants (gmail, yahoo!, microsoft, etc) and are urging people to set up their own email services, to “decentralize”. This brings up many many other issues though, and one of which is that if only a small group people use a certain email server, even if they use TLS, it’s relatively easy for someone passively monitoring (email) traffic to correlate who (from some server) is communicating with whom (from another server). Even if the connection and the content is protected by TLS and GPG respectively, some people might feel uncomfortable if a third party knew that they are actually communicating (well these people better not use email, but let’s not get carried away).

    This post is about sending SMTP traffic between two servers on the Internet over Tor, that is without someone being able to easily see who is sending what to whom. IMHO, it can be helpful in some situations to certain groups of people.

    There are numerous posts on the Internet about how you can Torify all the SMTP connections of a postfix server, the problem with this approach is that most exit nodes are blacklisted by RBLs so it’s very probable that the emails sent will either not reach their target or will get marked as spam. Another approach is to create hidden services and make users send emails to each other at their hidden service domains, eg username@a2i4gzo2bmv9as3avx.onion. This is quite uncomfortable for users and it can never get adopted.

    There is yet another approach though, the communication could happen over Tor hidden services that real domains are mapped to.

    Both sides need to run a Tor client:
    aptitude install tor torsocks

    The setup is the following, the postmaster on the receiving side sets up a Tor Hidden Service for their SMTP service (receiver). This is easily done in his server (server-A) with the following line in the torrc:
    HiddenServicePort 25 25. Let’s call this HiddenService-A (abcdefghijklmn12.onion). He then needs to notify other postmasters of this hidden service.

    The postmaster on the sending side (server-B) needs to create 2 things, a torified SMTP service (sender) for postfix and a transport map that will redirect emails sent to domains of server-A to HiddenService-A.

    Steps needed to be executed on server-B:
    1. Create /usr/lib/postfix/smtp_tor with the following content:

    usewithtor /usr/lib/postfix/smtp $@

    2. Make it executable
    chmod +x /usr/lib/postfix/smtp_tor

    3. Edit /etc/postfix/ and add a new service entry
    smtptor unix - - - - - smtp_tor

    4. If you don’t already have a transport map file, create /etc/postfix/transport with content (otherwise just add the following to your transport maps file):

    .onion              smtptor:        smtptor:[abcdefghijklmn12.onion]        smtptor:[abcdefghijklmn12.onion]

    5. if you don’t already have a transport map file edit /etc/postfix/ and add the following:
    transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport

    6. run the following:
    postmap /etc/postfix/transport && service postfix reload

    Well that’s about it, now every email sent from a user of server-B to will actually get sent over Tor to server-A on its HiddenService. Since HiddenServices are usually mapped on, it will bypass the usual sender restrictions. Depending on the setup of the receiver it might even evade spam detection software, so beware…If both postmasters follow the above steps then all emails sent from users of server-A to users of server-B and vice versa will be sent anonymously over Tor.

    There is nothing really new in this post, but I couldn’t find any other posts describing such a setup. Since it requires both sides to actually do something for things to work, I don’t think it can ever be used widely, but it’s still yet another way to take advantage of Tor and Hidden Services.

    Can hidden services scale to support hundreds or thousands of connections e.g. from a mailing list ? who knows…
    This type of setup needs the help of big fishes (large independent email providers like Riseup) to protect the small fishes (your own email server). So a new problem arises, bootstrapping and I’m not really sure this problem has any elegant solution. The more servers use this setup though, the more useful it becomes against passive adversaries trying to correlate who communicates with whom.
    The above setup works better when there are more than one hidden services running on the receiving side so a passive adversary won’t really know that the incoming traffic is SMTP, eg when you also run a (busy) HTTP server as a hidden service at the same machine.
    Hey, where did MX record lookup go ?

    Trying it
    If anyone wants to try it, you can send me an email using voidgrz25evgseyc.onion as the Hidden SMTP Service (in the transport map).


    Ασφαλιστικά μέτρα ΑΕΠΙ κατά παρόχων, 2013 edition

    Πριν λίγες μέρες έγινε πάρα πολύ σημαντική δίκη για το Ελληνικό Internet. Δυστυχώς όμως δεν έγινε καμία αναφορά από τους δημοσιογράφους που ασχολούνται με τα “νέα μέσα” για το θέμα, οι μόνοι οι οποίοι έχουν αναφερθεί στο θέμα και μάλιστα το έχουν παρακολουθήσει από πολύ κοντά είναι τα παιδιά του (Thread).

    Λίγο ιστορία…
    Πέρυσι είχαμε την “χαρά” το Πρωτοδικείο Αθηνών με την απόφαση 4658/2012 να δικαιώσει την ΑΕΠΙ στα ασφαλιστικά μέτρα που είχε κάνει εναντίον όλων των Ελλήνων παρόχων (ISPs) ώστε να αποκλειστεί η πρόσβαση προς 2 sites που βρισκόταν εκτός της χώρας μας. Η αίτηση των ασφαλιστικών μέτρων έγινε τον Οκτώβριο του 2010 και η τελική δίκη μετά τις αναβολές έγινε το Μάϊο του 2012. Τα 2 sites ήταν το και το Ενώ η ΑΕΠΙ είχε ζητήσει να αποκλειστούν από τους παρόχους και οι IPs που κατείχαν τότε τα 2 sites αλλά και να αποκλειστούν από το επίπεδο του DNS, τα δικαστήρια διέταξαν μόνο τον αποκλεισμό των IPs. Οι περισσότεροι χρήστες του Ελληνικού Internet δεν έχουν την παραμικρή ιδέα για αυτή τη απόφαση και αυτό γιατί δεν τους επηρέασε στο ελάχιστο. Το ellinadiko για δικούς του λόγους είχε κλείσει πριν γίνει η δίκη, και έτσι οι χρήστες είχαν ήδη στραφεί σε άλλα sites, ενώ το music-bazaar είχε αλλάξει IP. Ενώ, δηλαδή, το δικαστήριο επέβαλε στους παρόχους να αποκλείσουν την IP το music-bazaar είχε ήδη πριν την δίκη μεταφερθεί στην Έτσι, και η IP του ellinadiko και η IP του music-bazaar στις οποίες γινόταν αναφορά στα ασφαλιστικά μέτρα του 2012 είναι αυτή τη στιγμή μη προσβάσιμες από τους Έλληνες χρήστες χωρίς να φιλοξενούν οτιδήποτε σχετικό με τα προηγούμενα sites. Και το ακόμα καλύτερο; Κανείς δεν γνωρίζει αν και πότε θα αρθούν αυτοί οι αποκλεισμοί, καθώς δεν υπάρχει τέτοια πρόβλεψη στην απόφαση. Οπότε ο δικαστής αυτός δημιούργησε δύο μαύρες τρύπες για το Ελληνικό Internet.

    Τώρα που πήρε φόρα…
    Στις 14/01/2013 η ΑΕΠΙ επανήλθε με 2 νέες αιτήσεις ασφαλιστικών μέτρων! Η πρώτη αφορούσε αποκλειστικά το website με όνομα και την IP του ( και η δεύτερη αφορούσε το website με όνομα και την IP του ( Σαν να μην έφτανε αυτό στις 26/04/2013 έρχεται και νέα αίτηση για ασφαλιστικά μέτρα για τα παρακάτω sites: (,,,,,,,,, και τις IPs που είχαν τότε. Στα ασφαλιστικά μέτρα ζητείται να αποκλειστεί η πρόσβαση στα website ή στις IP ή αν τα παραπάνω δεν γίνουν, ζητά να απαγορευτούν τα downloads (καταφορτώσεις) μουσικών έργων από αυτά τα websites (ζητά δηλαδή την εφαρμογή DPI (Deep Packet Inspection) από τους παρόχους). Η αίτηση της ΑΕΠΙ αναφέρει με 2 λόγια πως αφού δεν μπορούν να εντοπίσουν τους ιδιοκτήτες των websites αυτών, ζητούν από τα δικαστήρια να προστατέψει τα μέλη της ΑΕΠΙ από την “πειρατεία” εξαναγκάζοντας τους παρόχους να “τα κόψουν”. Μετά από διαπραγματεύσεις καταλήγει να γίνει μία δίκη και για τις τρεις αιτήσεις, τον Σεπτέμβριο του 2013. Η δίκη αναβάλλεται για τις 13/12/2013 όπου και έγινε. Τα επιχειρήματα των παρόχων ήταν για άλλη μια φορά πολύ καλά, αλλά μάλλον δεν παίζει και ιδιαίτερο ρόλο στα αυτιά των δικαστών που κατά πάσα πιθανότητα αγνοούν εντελώς τις τεχνικές λεπτομέρειες του εγχειρήματος, αν θεωρείται δύσκολο να εξηγήσει κανείς πως ακριβώς δουλεύουν τα torrents και γιατί τα websites αυτά δεν φιλοξενούν τα ίδια παράνομο περιεχόμενο, σκεφτείτε πόσο πιο δύσκολο είναι να να εξηγήσει κανείς πως δουλεύουν τα magnet links και το DHT. Άλλωστε φαίνεται πως οι δικαστές δεν ενδιαφέρονται ιδιαίτερα για το διαδίκτυο ή για την ιδιωτικότητα γενικότερα, διότι οι όποιες αποφάσεις βγουν θα επηρεάσουν σημαντικά την ιδιωτικότητα όλων των Ελλήνων χρηστών. Είμαστε πλέον σε αναμονή της απόφασης η οποία μπορεί να κάνει ακόμα και 3 μήνες για να βγει.

    Ίδια απόφαση με την 4658/2012 ή μήπως όχι;
    Η απόφαση ακόμα δεν έχει βγει αλλά κατά την εκτίμηση μου υπάρχει σοβαρή περίπτωση να είναι διαφορετική από την 4658/2012 και μάλιστα προς το χειρότερο. Αυτό γιατί στο ενδιάμεσο έχει υπάρξει άλλη μια απίστευτη κίνηση από μεριάς του κράτους η οποία υπονομεύει την ελεύθερη λειτουργία του Internet στην Ελλάδα. Το κράτος λοιπόν, θέλοντας να τα τσεπώνει από τις άδειες που χορηγεί στα sites σχετικά με τον τζόγο (στοιχήματα) έχει δημιουργήσει την ΕΕΕΠ. Τι είναι η ΕΕΕΠ; Επιτροπή Εποπτείας και Ελέγχου Παιγνίων. Αυτή η επιτροπή λοιπόν έχει το δικαίωμα να αποφασίζει ποια websites τζόγου θα αποκλειστούν από τους παρόχους ώστε να μην έχουν πρόσβαση οι χρήστες τους σε αυτά. Όποιος δεν πληρώνει, κόβεται. Μάλιστα, επειδή ξέρουν πόσο δύσκολο είναι να απαγορεύσεις την πρόσβαση σε ένα site στο Internet μπλοκάροντας απλά μια IP, αυτοί έχουν την εξουσία να παραγγέλνουν από τους ISPs να μπλοκάρουν URLs χωρίς να ενδιαφέρονται για το πως θα το υλοποιήσει ο πάροχος. Κάθε τόσο λοιπόν εμφανίζουν μια λίστα με URLs στους παρόχους και τους αναγκάζουν να κόψουν την πρόσβαση. Η πιο πρόσφατη λίστα όσο γράφεται αυτό το post είναι αυτή: BlackList EEEP 22/11/2013. Αυτό το pdf είναι και το μόνο που παρέχουν στους παρόχους, ούτε καν μια λίστα σε μορφή txt για να είναι ευκολότερη η αυτοματοποίηση. Και το επισημαίνω για άλλη μια φορά, δίνουν URLs και όχι domains ή IPs.

    Τί σημαίνει αυτό όμως στην ουσία για παρόχους και χρήστες;
    Οι πάροχοι δεν μπορούν να κόψουν τις IPs των betting sites γιατί α) είναι πιθανόν στις ίδιες IPs να συστεγάζονται και άλλα sites, β) κάποια betting sites γίνονται host σε εταιρίες τύπου Akamai, Cloudflare,κτλ δεν είναι δυνατόν να κόψει ένας πάροχος τα CDN αυτά, γ) ένα site μπορεί να αλλάζει IPs όποτε θέλει, άρα ποιος θα παρακολουθεί τι κάνει το κάθε site κάθε μέρα; Επειδή, από όσο μπορώ να γνωρίζω, οι ελληνικοί πάροχοι σταθερού Internet (xDSL) δεν έχουν αυτή τη στιγμή δυνατότητα να κάνουν DPI, να κοιτάνε δηλαδή κάθε πακέτο ποια “web/URL” (και όχι IP) διεύθυνση αναφέρει μέσα του και να κόβουν μόνο αυτά, μένουν με ένα και μοναδικό “όπλο” στα χέρια τους. Το DNS block. Δηλαδή, οι DNS servers των ελληνικών ISPs λένε ψέμματα στους χρήστες για τις πραγματικές διευθύνσεις των betting sites που θέλει να κόψει η ΕΕΕΠ. Αντί να δίνουν στους χρήστες τις σωστές IPs ενός site, δίνουν μια ψεύτικη ή δεν απαντούν καθόλου και αυτό κάνει τον χρήστη να θεωρεί πως δεν δουλεύει πλέον το website που θέλει να επισκεπτεί. Φυσικά οι χρήστες έχουν την δυνατότητα να χρησιμοποιήσουν άλλους DNS servers, εκτός του παρόχου τους – εκτός Ελλάδας βασικά, για να μάθουν τις σωστές απαντήσεις στα DNS ερωτήματά τους. Αυτό όμως με την σειρά του δημιουργεί διάφορα θέματα. Καταρχήν όταν ρωτάς ένα DNS server στο εξωτερικό όλα τα DNS ερωτήματα καθυστερούν λίγο παραπάνω, το λίγο μπορεί να σημαίνει πως από τα 10-20ms που έχει κάποιος με τους DNS servers του ISP του μπορεί να φτάσει τα 60-80 ή και 100ms, δηλαδή μια καθυστέρηση τουλάχιστον της τάξης του 3-5x. Έπειτα σημαίνει πως ο νέος “DNS” πάροχος αυτός ξέρει ό,τι κάνει κάποιος Έλληνας χρήστης και μπορεί φυσικά να χρησιμοποιήσει τα δεδομένα αυτά όπως του αρέσει. Φυσικά o πάροχος αυτός δεν υπόκειται στην Ελληνική νομοθεσία, άρα τα προσωπικά δεδομένα των χρηστών – δηλαδή το ποια sites επισκέπτεται ο καθένας, μπορεί να τα χειριστεί ο πάροχος αυτός χωρίς να χρειάζεται να συμμορφωθεί με τους ελληνικούς νόμους περί προστασίας των δεδομένων. Αν εγώ αύριο χρησιμοποιήσω ένα DNS server του εξωτερικού κανείς δεν μου εγγυάται πως α) οι δικές του απαντήσεις δεν θα με στέλνουν σε sites με malware ή δεν θα βγάλει κάποτε μια λίστα με το ποια sites ζήτησα να επισκεφτώ…Το πρόβλημα όμως δεν τελειώνει εκεί, αν διαβάσει κανείς το ένα από τα ΦΕΚ που αφορούν την λειτουργία της ΕΕΕΠ θα δει πως τα πράγματα είναι πολύ χειρότερα από όσο μπορεί να φανταστεί. Οι τολμηροί ας διαβάσουν το άρθρο 52 του ν.4002/2011 (Α 218). Παραδείγματα:
    Αν σε πιάσουν ως χρήστη να παίζεις σε μη αδειοδοτημένο website…

    Όποιος μετέχει σε τυχερό παίγνιο, το οποίο διοργανώνεται χωρίς άδεια από την Ελληνική Δημοκρατία, τιμωρείται με ποινή φυλάκισης έως τριών (3) μηνών και με χρηματική ποινή από 5.000 έως 20.000 ευρώ.

    Αν σε πιάσουν να παρέχεις proxy ή άλλο μέσο ώστε να παίζει κάποιος τρίτος σε μη αδειοδοτημένο website…

    Όποιος μετέχει σε παίγνια μέσω παρενθέτου φυσικού ή νομικού προσώπου τιμωρείται με φυλάκιση έως δύο (2) ετών και χρηματική ποινή από 100.000 έως 200.000 ευρώ. Με τις ίδιες ποινές τιμωρείται και το παρένθετο φυσικό πρόσωπο και αν πρόκειται για νομικό πρόσωπο, τα πρόσωπα που καθορίζονται ως αυτουργοί με την παράγραφο 11.

    Και κάτι ακόμα ως τροφή για σκέψη, σε μια από τις προσκλήσεις για συζήτηση της ΕΕΕΠ προς τους παρόχους, δύο από τα θέματα της ατζέντας ήταν μεταξύ άλλων το πως θα ελεγχθεί/αποκλειστεί η πρόσβαση στα betting sites μέσω proxy και έπειτα αν μπορεί η ΕΕΕΠ να έχει μια λίστα με τους χρήστες που επισκέπτονται αυτά τα sites (!?).

    Αυτά συμβαίνουν σήμερα στο Ελληνικό Internet, δεν είναι από κάποιο φαντασιακό μέλλον, αλλά από το σήμερα.

    Τι μπορεί να γίνει με τα ασφαλιστικά μέτρα;
    Γυρνώντας στα πρόσφατα ασφαλιστικά μέτρα, κάποιος δικαστής που θα κάνει ένα ελαφρύ διάβασμα και θα ρωτήσει και 2-3 άλλους (ή θα του το ψιθυρίσει η ΑΕΠΙ) θα δει πως υπάρχει ο 4002/2011 που απαγορεύει γενικά και αόριστα την πρόσβαση σε sites. Το πως το αφήνει στους παρόχους…κάντε ό,τι καταλαβαίνετε…αλλιώς θα πάτε φυλακή. Άρα η προσωπική μου εκτίμηση για την απόφαση είναι πως αν μείνει στον αποκλεισμό IP των websites που αναφέρονται στα ασφαλιστικά μέτρα, μάλλον θα πρόκειται για “νίκη”. Δεν θεωρώ όμως πως αυτό το σενάριο έχει ιδιαίτερη βάση. Για μένα είτε θα βγει μια ακυρωτική απόφαση για τα ασφαλιστικά μέτρα, είναι η αλήθεια πως οι πάροχοι αυτή τη φορά το είχαν πάρει το θέμα πολύ πιο σοβαρά από την προηγούμενη, είτε η απόφαση θα αναφέρει συγκεκριμένα το DNS block. Το DNS block απλά θα ανοίξει τους ασκούς του Αιόλου για το τι μπορεί να ακολουθήσει. Και να είμαστε όλοι σίγουροι πως η ΑΕΠΙ δεν θα σταματήσει στο DNS block… Αλλά δεν είναι το πρόβλημα μόνο η ΑΕΠΙ ή η ΕΕΕΠ. Το πρόβλημα είναι πως έχει αρχίσει και στην Ελλάδα να υπάρχει η νοοτροπία αλλά και η νομική κάλυψη περί απαγόρευσης πρόσβασης σε συγκεκριμένες ιστοσελίδες που οι servers τους δεν βρίσκονται καν στην χώρα μας. Με το πρόσχημα είτε της πειρατείας είτε της μη αδειοδότησης, αποκλείονται ιστότοποι από τους Έλληνες χρήστες. Μάλιστα, τα μέτρα που λαμβάνονται κάθε φορά φαίνεται να έχουν όλο και πιο προηγμένο τεχνολογικό χαρακτήρα και λίγο μας χωρίζει πλέον από το να λαμβάνει η χώρα μας μέτρα τύπου Ιράν και Κίνας. Μπορεί να ακούγεται τραβηγμένο, αλλά από την στιγμή που θα εγκατασταθεί η τεχνολογία (DPI) για να κόβεις την “πειρατεία” ή τα “παράνομα” sites τζόγου δεν μπορείς να είσαι σίγουρος για το τι άλλο θα κηρυχθεί παράνομο αύριο και θα κοπεί με την ίδια τεχνολογία.
    Προσωπικά σιχαίνομαι τα betting sites όσο τίποτε άλλο, αλλά αυτό δεν με σταματάει από το να υποστηρίζω το δικαίωμά τους να μην λογοκρίνονται. Γιατί αυτό είναι και το ζουμί της υπόθεσης, αρχίζει πλέον το κράτος/εξουσία να λογοκρίνει όλο και περισσότερα κομμάτια του Internet που δεν αρέσουν.

    Και στο μέλλον;
    Δεν είναι τυχαίο άλλωστε πως στο σχεδιαζόμενο “samaras-wifi” ανακοινώθηκε πως φυσικά θα υπάρχει φίλτρο περιεχομένου, πριν καν μάθουμε οποιεσδήποτε άλλες ποιοτικές πληροφορίες για το δίκτυο το ίδιο:

    “όταν εγκατασταθεί (το wifi), να τοποθετηθούν ειδικά φίλτρα που να απαγορεύουν πρόσβαση σε σελίδες με άσεμνο περιεχόμενο και γενικά σε σελίδες σεξ, καθώς και να υπάρχουν φίλτρα ώστε να μην μπορεί κανείς να «κατεβάσει» τραγούδια ή κινηματογραφικές ταινίες!”.

    Πέραν της υπονοούμενης αναφοράς σε DPI, το ποιός θα αποφασίζει τι επιτρέπεται (τι σημαίνει “άσεμνο”;;;) και τί όχι, το πώς, κτλ αφήνεται εντελώς ασαφές. Η λογοκρισία μπαίνει στη ζωή κάθε πολίτη με μικρά αλλά σταθερά βήματα, θεωρώντας δεδομένη την κατάσταση που επικρατεί ήδη, η εκάστοτε κυριαρχία/εξουσία επιβάλει όλο και περισσότερες απαγορεύσεις, “για το καλό μας”.

    Υ.Γ. Οι παραπάνω απόψεις είναι προφανώς προσωπικές πολύ πιθανόν ο εργοδότης μου να έχει εντελώς διαφορετικές :)
    Υ.Γ.2 Ίσως να μην είναι αργά ακόμα, αν κάποιοι δημοσιογράφοι αναδείξουν το θέμα κατάλληλα μπορεί και να καταφέρουμε την ακύρωση των ασφαλιστικών μέτρων. Ελπίζω να γλυτώσουμε όμως την κλάψα μετά την απόφαση, το “δεν ήξερα” δεν μπορεί να είναι πλέον δικαιολογία.
    Υ.Γ.3 Δεν είμαι νομικός, αν κάποιος νομικός γνωρίζει περισσότερα για τα παραπάνω ας με διορθώσει.

    Creating a new GPG key with subkeys

    A few weeks ago I created my new GPG/PGP key with subkeys and a few people asked me why and how. The rationale for creating separate subkeys for signing and encryption is written very nicely in the subkeys page of the debian wiki. The short answer is that having separate subkeys makes key management a lot easier and protects you in certain occasions, for example you can create a new subkey when you need to travel or when your laptop gets stolen, without losing previous signatures. Obviously you need to keep your master key somewhere very very safe and certainly not online or attached to a computer.

    You can find many other blog posts on the net on the subject, but most of them are missing a few parts. I’ll try to keep this post as complete as possible. If you are to use gpg subkeys you definitely need an encrypted usb to store the master key at the end. So if you don’t already have an encrypted USB go and make one first.

    When this process is over you will have a gpg keypair on your laptop without the master key, you will be able to use that for everyday encryption and signing of documents but there’s a catch. You won’t be able to sign other people’s keys. To do that you will need the master key. But that is something that does not happen very often so it should not be a problem in your everyday gpg workflow. You can read about signing other people’s keys at the end of this post. AFAIK you can’t remove your master key using some of the gpg GUIs, so your only hope is the command line. Live with it…

    First some basic information that will be needed later.
    When listing secret keys with gpg -K keys are marked with either ‘sec’ or ‘ssb’. When listing (public) keys with gpg -k keys are marked with ‘pub’ or ‘sub’.

    sec => 'SECret key'
    ssb => 'Secret SuBkey'
    pub => 'PUBlic key'
    sub => 'public SUBkey'

    When editing a key you will see a usage flag on the right. Each key has a role and that is represented by a character. These are the roles and their corresponding characters:

    Constant           Character      Explanation
    PUBKEY_USAGE_SIG      S       key is good for signing
    PUBKEY_USAGE_CERT     C       key is good for certifying other signatures
    PUBKEY_USAGE_ENC      E       key is good for encryption
    PUBKEY_USAGE_AUTH     A       key is good for authentication

    Before doing anything make sure you have a backup of your .gnupg dir.
    $ umask 077; tar -cf $HOME/gnupg-backup.tar -C $HOME .gnupg

    Secure preferences
    Now edit your .gnupg/gpg.conf and add or change the following settings (most are stolen from Riseup: OpenPGP Best Practices):

    # when outputting certificates, view user IDs distinctly from keys:
    # long keyids are more collision-resistant than short keyids (it's trivial to make a key with any desired short keyid)
    keyid-format 0xlong
    # when multiple digests are supported by all recipients, choose the strongest one:
    personal-digest-preferences SHA512 SHA384 SHA256 SHA224
    # preferences chosen for new keys should prioritize stronger algorithms:
    default-preference-list SHA512 SHA384 SHA256 SHA224 AES256 AES192 AES CAST5 BZIP2 ZLIB ZIP Uncompressed
    # If you use a graphical environment (and even if you don't) you should be using an agent:
    # (similar arguments as
    # You should always know at a glance which User IDs gpg thinks are legitimately bound to the keys in your keyring:
    verify-options show-uid-validity
    list-options show-uid-validity
    # when making an OpenPGP certification, use a stronger digest than the default SHA1:
    cert-digest-algo SHA256
    # prevent version string from appearing in your signatures/public keys

    Create new key
    Time to create the new key. I’m marking user input with bold (↞) arrows

    $ gpg --gen-key
    gpg (GnuPG) 1.4.12; Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
    This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
    There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
    Please select what kind of key you want:
       (1) RSA and RSA (default)
       (2) DSA and Elgamal
       (3) DSA (sign only)
       (4) RSA (sign only)
    Your selection? 1 ↞↞↞↞ 
    RSA keys may be between 1024 and 4096 bits long.
    What keysize do you want? (2048)  4096 ↞↞↞↞ 
    Requested keysize is 4096 bits
    Please specify how long the key should be valid.
    Please specify how long the key should be valid.
             0 = key does not expire
          <n>  = key expires in n days
          <n>w = key expires in n weeks
          <n>m = key expires in n months
          <n>y = key expires in n years
    Key is valid for? (0)  0 ↞↞↞↞ 
    Key does not expire at all
    Is this correct? (y/N)  y ↞↞↞↞ 
    You need a user ID to identify your key; the software constructs the user ID
    from the Real Name, Comment and Email Address in this form:
        "Heinrich Heine (Der Dichter) <>"
    Real name: foo bar ↞↞↞↞ 
    Email address: ↞↞↞↞ 
    You selected this USER-ID:
    "foo bar <>"
    Change (N)ame, (C)omment, (E)mail or (O)kay/(Q)uit?  O ↞↞↞↞ 
    You need a Passphrase to protect your secret key.
    We need to generate a lot of random bytes. It is a good idea to perform
    some other action (type on the keyboard, move the mouse, utilize the
    disks) during the prime generation; this gives the random number
    generator a better chance to gain enough entropy.
    gpg: key 0x6F87F32E2234961E marked as ultimately trusted
    public and secret key created and signed.
    gpg: checking the trustdb
    gpg: 3 marginal(s) needed, 1 complete(s) needed, PGP trust model
    gpg: depth: 0  valid:   3  signed:  14  trust: 0-, 0q, 0n, 0m, 0f, 3u
    gpg: depth: 1  valid:  14  signed:   9  trust: 13-, 1q, 0n, 0m, 0f, 0u
    gpg: next trustdb check due at 2014-03-18
    pub   4096R/0x6F87F32E2234961E 2013-12-01
          Key fingerprint = 407E 45F0 D914 8277 3D28  CDD8 6F87 F32E 2234 961E
    uid                 [ultimate] foo bar <>
    sub   4096R/0xD3DCB1F51C37970B 2013-12-01

    Then add another uid and add it as the default:

    $ gpg --edit-key 0x6F87F32E2234961E                                      
    gpg (GnuPG) 1.4.12; Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
    This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
    There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
    Secret key is available.
    pub  4096R/0x6F87F32E2234961E  created: 2013-12-01  expires: never       usage: SC  
                                   trust: ultimate      validity: ultimate
    sub  4096R/0xD3DCB1F51C37970B  created: 2013-12-01  expires: never       usage: E   
    [ultimate] (1). foo bar <>
    gpg> adduid ↞↞↞↞ 
    Real name: foo bar ↞↞↞↞ 
    Email address: ↞↞↞↞ 
    You selected this USER-ID:
        "foo bar <>"
    Change (N)ame, (C)omment, (E)mail or (O)kay/(Q)uit?  O ↞↞↞↞ 
    You need a passphrase to unlock the secret key for
    user: "foo bar <>"
    4096-bit RSA key, ID 0x6F87F32E2234961E, created 2013-12-01
    pub  4096R/0x6F87F32E2234961E  created: 2013-12-01  expires: never       usage: SC  
                                   trust: ultimate      validity: ultimate
    sub  4096R/0xD3DCB1F51C37970B  created: 2013-12-01  expires: never       usage: E   
    [ultimate] (1)  foo bar <>
    [ unknown] (2). foo bar <>
    gpg> uid 2 ↞↞↞↞ 
    gpg> primary ↞↞↞↞ 
    gpg> save ↞↞↞↞ 

    Let’s see what we’ve got until now, 0x6F87F32E2234961E is the master key (SC flags) and 0xD3DCB1F51C37970B (E flag)is a separate subkey for encryption.

    Add new signing subkey
    Since we already have a separate encryption subkey, it’s time for a new signing subkey. Expiration dates for keys is a very hot topic. IMHO there’s no point in having an encryption subkey with an expiration date, expired keys are working just fine for decryption anyways, so I’ll leave it without one, but I want the signing key that I’m regularly using to have an expiration date. You can read more about this topic on the gnupg manual (Selecting expiration dates and using subkeys).

    $ gpg --edit-key 0x6F87F32E2234961E
    gpg (GnuPG) 1.4.12; Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
    This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
    There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
    Secret key is available.
    pub  4096R/0x6F87F32E2234961E  created: 2013-12-01  expires: never       usage: SC  
                                   trust: ultimate      validity: ultimate
    sub  4096R/0xD3DCB1F51C37970B  created: 2013-12-01  expires: never       usage: E   
    [ultimate] (1). foo bar <>
    [ultimate] (2)  foo bar <>
    gpg> addkey ↞↞↞↞ 
    Key is protected.
    You need a passphrase to unlock the secret key for
    user: "foo bar <>"
    4096-bit RSA key, ID 0x6F87F32E2234961E, created 2013-12-01
    Please select what kind of key you want:
       (3) DSA (sign only)
       (4) RSA (sign only)
       (5) Elgamal (encrypt only)
       (6) RSA (encrypt only)
    Your selection? 4 ↞↞↞↞ 
    RSA keys may be between 1024 and 4096 bits long.
    What keysize do you want? (2048) 4096 ↞↞↞↞ 
    Requested keysize is 4096 bits
    Please specify how long the key should be valid.
             0 = key does not expire
            = key expires in n days
          w = key expires in n weeks
          m = key expires in n months
          y = key expires in n years
    Key is valid for? (0) 5y ↞↞↞↞ 
    Key expires at Fri 30 Nov 2018 03:36:47 PM EET
    Is this correct? (y/N) y ↞↞↞↞ 
    Really create? (y/N) y ↞↞↞↞ 
    We need to generate a lot of random bytes. It is a good idea to perform
    some other action (type on the keyboard, move the mouse, utilize the
    disks) during the prime generation; this gives the random number
    generator a better chance to gain enough entropy.
    pub  4096R/0x6F87F32E2234961E  created: 2013-12-01  expires: never       usage: SC  
                                   trust: ultimate      validity: ultimate
    sub  4096R/0xD3DCB1F51C37970B  created: 2013-12-01  expires: never       usage: E   
    sub  4096R/0x296B12D067F65B03  created: 2013-12-01  expires: 2018-11-30  usage: S   
    [ultimate] (1). foo bar <>
    [ultimate] (2)  foo bar <>
    gpg> save ↞↞↞↞ 

    As you can see there’s a new subkey 0x296B12D067F65B03 with just the S flag, that the signing subkey.
    Before moving forward it’s wise to create a revocation certificate:

    $ gpg --output 0x6F87F32E2234961E.gpg-revocation-certificate --armor --gen-revoke 0x6F87F32E2234961E
    sec  4096R/0x6F87F32E2234961E 2013-12-01 foo bar <>
    Create a revocation certificate for this key? (y/N) y
    Please select the reason for the revocation:
      0 = No reason specified
      1 = Key has been compromised
      2 = Key is superseded
      3 = Key is no longer used
      Q = Cancel
    (Probably you want to select 1 here)
    Your decision? 1 ↞↞↞↞ 
    Enter an optional description; end it with an empty line:
    > This revocation certificate was generated when the key was created. ↞↞↞↞ 
    Reason for revocation: Key has been compromised
    This revocation certificate was generated when the key was created.
    Is this okay? (y/N) y ↞↞↞↞ 
    You need a passphrase to unlock the secret key for
    user: "foo bar <>"
    4096-bit RSA key, ID 0x6F87F32E2234961E, created 2013-12-01
    Revocation certificate created.
    Please move it to a medium which you can hide away; if Mallory gets
    access to this certificate he can use it to make your key unusable.
    It is smart to print this certificate and store it away, just in case
    your media become unreadable.  But have some caution:  The print system of
    your machine might store the data and make it available to others!

    Encrypt this file and store it someplace safe, eg your encrypted USB. You should definitely not leave it at your laptop’s hard disk. You can even print it and keep it in this form, it’s small enough so one could type it if needed.

    Remove Master key
    And now the interesting part, it’s time to remove the master key from your laptops’s keychain and just leave the subkeys. You will store the master key in the encrypted usb so it stays safe.

    First go and backup your .gnupg dir on your encrypted USB. Don’t move forward until you do that. DON’T!

    $ rsync -avp $HOME/.gnupg /media/encrypted-usb
    $ umask 077; tar -cf /media/encrypted-usb/gnupg-backup-new.tar -C $HOME .gnupg

    Did you backup your key? Are you sure ?

    Then it’s time to remove the master key!

    $ gpg --export-secret-subkeys 0x6F87F32E2234961E > /media/encrypted-usb/subkeys
    $ gpg --delete-secret-key 0x6F87F32E2234961E
    $ gpg --import /media/encrypted-usb/subkeys
    $ shred -u /media/encrypted-usb/subkeys

    What you’ve accomplished with this process is export the subkeys to /media/encrypted-usb/subkeys then delete the master key and re-import just the subkeys. Master key resides only on the encrypted USB key now. Don’t lose that USB key. USB keys are extremely cheap, make multiple copies of the encrypted key and place them in safe places, you can give one such key to your parents or your closest friend in case of emergency. For safety, make sure there’s at least one copy outside of your residence.

    You can see the difference of the deleted master key by comparing the listing of the secret keys in your .gnupg and your /media/encrypted-usb/.gnupg/ dir.

    $ gpg -K 0x6F87F32E2234961E                                             
    sec#   4096R/0x6F87F32E2234961E 2013-12-01
    uid                            foo bar <>
    uid                            foo bar <>
    ssb   4096R/0xD3DCB1F51C37970B 2013-12-01
    ssb   4096R/0x296B12D067F65B03 2013-12-01 [expires: 2018-11-30] 
    $ gpg --home=/media/encrypted-usb/.gnupg/ -K 0x6F87F32E2234961E                                             
    sec   4096R/0x6F87F32E2234961E 2013-12-01
    uid                            foo bar <>
    uid                            foo bar <>
    ssb   4096R/0xD3DCB1F51C37970B 2013-12-01
    ssb   4096R/0x296B12D067F65B03 2013-12-01 [expires: 2018-11-30] 

    Notice the pound (#) in the ‘sec’ line from your ~/.gnupg/. That means that the master key is missing.

    Upload your new key to the keyservers if you want to…

    Key Migration
    In case you’re migrating from an older key you need to sign your new key with the old one (not the other way around!)
    $ gpg --default-key 0xOLD_KEY --sign-key 0x6F87F32E2234961E

    Write a transition statement and sign it with both the old and the new key:

    $ gpg --armor -b -u 0xOLD_KEY -o sig1.txt gpg-transition.txt
    $ gpg --armor -b -u 0x6F87F32E2234961E -o sig2.txt gpg-transition.txt

    That’s about it…upload the transition statement and your signatures to some public space (or mail it to your web of trust).

    Signing other people’s keys
    Because your laptop’s keypair does not have the master key anymore and the master key is the only one with the ‘C’ flag, when you want to sign someone else’s key, you will need to mount your encrypted USB and then issue a command that’s using that encrypted directory:
    $ gpg --home=/media/encrypted-usb/.gnupg/ --sign-key 0xSomeones_keyid
    Export your signature and send it back to people whose key you just signed..

    Things to play with in the future
    Next stop ? An OpenPGP Smartcard! (eshop) or a yubikey NEO, (related blogpost). Any Greeks want to join me for a mass (5+) order?


    P.S. 0x6F87F32E2234961E is obviously just a demo key. You can find my real key here.
    P.S.2 The above commands were executed on gpg 1.4.12 on Debian Wheezy. In the future the output of the commands will probably differ.

    New gpg key

    I’ve decided to change my old gpg key with a new RSA 4096bits.

    My new gpg key id is 0x7011E02C or if you prefer the longer version 0x897C03177011E02C

    Transition statement

    Date: 11/11/2013
    For a number of reasons[0], I've recently set up a new OpenPGP key,
    and will be transitioning away from my old one.
    The old key will continue to be valid for some time, but I prefer all
    future correspondence to come to the new one.  I would also like this
    new key to be re-integrated into the web of trust.  This message is
    signed by both keys to certify the transition.
    the old key was:
    pub   1024D/0x4A0A1BC8E4F4FFE6 2008-03-19 [expires: 2014-03-18]
          Key fingerprint = 9EB8 31BE C618 07CE 1B51  818D 4A0A 1BC8 E4F4 FFE6
    And the new key is:
    pub   4096R/0x897C03177011E02C 2013-11-11
          Key fingerprint = 79B1 9198 B8F6 803B EC37  5638 897C 0317 7011 E02C
    To fetch the new key, you can get it with:
      wget -q -O- | gpg --import -
    Or, to fetch my new key from a public key server, you can simply do:
      gpg --keyserver --recv-key 0x897C03177011E02C
    If you already know my old key, you can now verify that the new key is
    signed by the old one:
      gpg --check-sigs 0x897C03177011E02C
    If you don't already know my old key, or you just want to be double
    extra paranoid, you can check the fingerprint against the one above:
      gpg --fingerprint 0x897C03177011E02C
    George Kargiotakis

    You can find the above text here, signed by my old key and my new key.

    Greek PGP Web of Trust 2012 edition

    I’ve very glad for hosting this guest post. Dorothea put some real effort into it. So…enjoy!

    In 2008 Patroklos Argyroudis created the first visualization of the greek PGP web of trust, based on information supplied mostly by people who attended a keysigning party at Thessaloniki. You can read his related posts at [0]
    In 2012, during the second cryptoparty [1] at [2], George Kargiotakis suggested if someone wanted to update the network. I decided to undertake the task and you can see some of the visualizations below.

    1. Venn of persons that have signed others and of persons that have been signed by others
    2. Greek PGP network for 2012
    3. Trust in the 2012 Greek PGP network
    4. Highlighting the persons who have signed more people
    5. Do people trust more persons than they are trusted by?
    6. Geolocation of individuals (globally)
    7. Geolocation of individuals (in Greece)
    8. Gender percentages
    9. Educational and research institutes in the PGP network
    10. Animation: Formation through time of associations that were active in 2012
    11. Communities and the ten most important positions in the 2012 Greek PGP network according to Eigen value centrality

    Additional sections:
    12. Outline of methodology
    13. Keyserver & keys used
    14. Notes on methodology
    15. Software and visualization notes
    16. Problems encountered and how you can help
    17. Future plans
    18. Web references
    19. Synopsis
    20. Communication
    21. Thanks

    How Vodafone Greece degrades my Internet experience

    The title may sound a bit pompous, but please read on and you’ll see how certain decisions can cripple, or totally disrupt modern Internet services and communications as these are offered(?) by Vodafone’s mobile Internet solutions.

    == The situation ==
    I’ve bought a mobile Internet package from Vodafone Greece in order to be able to have 3G access in places where I don’t have access to wifi or ethernet. I am also using a local caching resolver on my laptop (Debian Linux), running unbound software, to both speed up my connections and to have mandatory DNSSEC validation for all my queries. Many of you might ask why do I need DNSSEC validation of all my queries since only very few domains are currently using DNSSEC, well I don’t have a reply that applies to everyone, let’s just say for now that I like to experiment with new things. After all, this is the only way to learn new things, experiment with them. Let’s not forget though that many TLDs are now signed, so there are definitely a few records to play with. Mandatory DNSSEC validation has led me in the past to identify and investigate a couple other problems, mostly having to do with broken DNSSEC records of various domains and more importantly dig deeper into IPv6 and fragmentation issues of various networks. This last topic is so big that it needs a blog post, or even a series of posts, of it’s own. It’s my job after all to find and solve problems, that’s what system or network administrators do (or should do).

    == My setup ==
    When you connect your 3G dongle with Vodafone Greece, they sent you 2 DNS servers (two out of,, through ipcp (ppp). In my setup though, I discard them and I just keep “nameserver” in my /etc/resolv.conf in order to use my local unbound. In unbound’s configuration I have set up 2 forwarders for my queries, actually when I know I am inside an IPv6 network I use 4 addresses, 2 IPv4 and 2 IPv6 for the same 2 forwarders. These forwarders are hosted where I work (GRNET NOC) and I have also set them up to do mandatory DNSSEC validation themselves.
    So my local resolver, which does DNSSEC validation, is contacting 2 other servers who also do DNSSEC validation. My queries carry the DNS protocol flag that asks for DNSSEC validation and I expect them to validate every response possible.

    As you can see in the following screenshot, here’s what happens when I want to visit a website. I ask my local caching resolver, and that resolver asks one of it’s forwarders adding the necessary DNSSEC flags in the query.
    The response might have the “ad” (authenticated) DNSSEC flag, depending whether the domain I’m visiting is DNSSEC signed or not.

    [Screenshot of DNS queries]

    == The problem ==
    What I noticed was that using this setup, I couldn’t visit any sites at all when I connected with my 3G dongle on Vodafone’s network. When I changed my /etc/resolv.conf to use Vodafone’s DNS servers directly, everything seemed work as normal, at least for browsing. But then I tried to query for DNSSEC related information on various domains manually using dig, Vodafone’s resolvers never sent me back any DNSSEC related information. Well actually they never sent me back any packet at all when I asked them for DNSSEC data.

    Here’s an example of what happens with and without asking for DNSSEC data. The first query is without requesting DNSSEC information and I get a normal reply, but upon asking for the extra DNSSEC data, I get nothing back.
    [Screenshot of +dnssec query through Vodafone’s servers]

    == Experimentation ==
    Obviously changing my forwarders configuration in unbound to the Vodafone DNS servers did not work because Vodafone’s DNS servers never send me back any DNSSEC information at all. Since my unbound is trying to do DNSSEC validation of everything, obviously including the root (.) zone, I need to get back packets that contain these records. Else everything fails. I could get unbound working with my previous forwarders or with Vodafone’s servers as forwarders, only by disabling the DNSSEC validation, that is commenting out the auto-trust-anchor-file option.

    Then I started doing tests on my original forwarders that I had in my configuration (and are managed by me). I could see that my query packets arrived at the server and the server always sent back the proper replies. But whenever the reply contained DNSSEC data, that packet was not forwarded to my computer through Vodafone’s 3G network.

    More tests were to follow and obviously my first choice were Google’s public resolvers, and Surprise, surprise! I could get any DNSSEC related information I wanted. The exact same result I got upon testing with OpenDNS resolvers, and From a list of “fairly known” public DNS servers that I found here, only ScrubIT servers seems to be currently blocked by Vodafone Greece. Comodo DNS, Norton DNS, and public Verizon DNS all work flawlessly.

    My last step was to try and get DNSSEC data over tcp instead of udp packets. Surprise, surprise again, well not at all any more… I could get back responses containing the DNSSEC information I wanted.

    == Conclusion ==
    Vodafone Greece for some strange reason (I have a few ideas, starting with…disabling skype) seems to “dislike” large UDP responses, among which are obviously DNS replies carrying DNSSEC information. These responses can sometimes be even bigger than 1500bytes. My guess is that in order to minimize hassle for their telephone support, they have whitelisted a bunch of “known” DNS servers. Obviously the thought of breaking DNSSEC and every DNSSEC signed domain for their customers hasn’t crossed their minds yet. What I don’t understand though is why their own DNS servers are not whitelisted. Since they trust other organizations’ servers to send big udp packets, why don’t they allow DNSSEC from their own servers? Misconfiguration? Ignorance? On purpose?

    The same behavior can (sometimes -> further investigation needed here) be seen while trying to use OpenVPN over udp. Over tcp with the same servers, everything works fine. That reminds me I really need to test ocserv soon…

    == Solution ==
    I won’t even try to contact Vodafone’s support and try to convince their telephone helpdesk to connect me to one of their network/infrastructure engineers. I think that would be completely futile. If any of you readers though, know anyone working at Vodafone Greece in _any_ technical department, please send them a link to this blog post. You will do a huge favor to all Vodafone Greece mobile Internet users and to the Internet itself.

    The Internet is not just for HTTP stuff, many of us use it in various other ways. It is unacceptable for any ISP to block, disrupt, interrupt or get in the middle of such communications.
    Each one of us users should be able to use DNSSEC without having to send all our queries to Google, OpenDNS or any other information harvesting organization.

    == Downloads ==
    I’m uploading some pcaps here for anyone who wants to take a look. Use wireshark/tcpdump to read them.

    A. tcpdump querying for a non-DNSSEC signed domain over 3G. One query without asking for DNSSEC and two queries asking for DNSSEC, all queries go to DNS server All queries arrived back. The tcpdump was created on

    B. tcpdump querying for a DNSSEC signed domain over 3G. One query without asking for DNSSEC and three queries asking for DNSSEC, all queries go to DNS server The last three queries never arrived back at my computer. The tcpdump was created on

    C. tcpdump querying for a DNSSEC signed domain over 3G. One query without asking for DNSSEC and another one asking for DNSSEC, all queries go to DNS Server All queries arrived back. The tcpdump was created on my computer using the PPP interface.

    World city map of Tor nodes

    Some months ago I started playing with the idea of creating a world map that would have every Tor node on it. Obviously I wan’t the first one…I soon discovered Moritz Bartl’s post on the same topic. Luckilly he had his code posted on Github so I could fork it and add features that I wanted. The original python script parsed the consensus and the misrodescriptors, put Tor nodes into some classes and created a KML file with some description on each node.

    Some differences
    I changed some parts of the python script to better suit my needs.
    a. Create a separate kml files for each Tor node class.
    b. Add new classes: Bad, Authority and Named.
    c. Pay more attention on requesting every external URL over HTTPS.
    d. Generate HTML code that displays those KMLs on a Google Maps overlay.
    e. Add some small randomization to each nodes’s coordinates so that nodes in the same city don’t overlap.

    You can find a complete changelog at kargig/tormap GitHub repo.

    And here’s the outcome: World city map of Tor nodes at
    One of my main goals was to have selectable classes of nodes that will appear on the map.

    To produce the map overlay, a cron script runs every hour, which is also the period it takes for Tor Authority nodes to produce a new consensus, and creates some static files which are then served by nginx.

    I’m not a web developer/designer and I don’t really know any javascript. So please, feel free to fork my code and make it look better, run faster and add your own features. I’ll happily accept patches/pull requests!

    On kargig/tormap repo you will also find a handy script, ‘’, that downloads all necessary files that need to be parsed by the python script.

    Missplaced nodes on the map
    Well, blame MaxMind’s GeoIP City database for that. But I think it’s kinda funny to see Tor nodes in Siberia and in the middle of the sea though (look at the West coast of Africa), heh. For those wondering, these nodes are gathered there because their geoip Lat,Long is set to 0,0.
    Really though, what’s “Ben’s Cat Shaque” diplayed there next to all those nodes in the west coast of Africa? Anyone has some clue ?

    Conspriracy people
    I’m sure that people who love conspriracy theories will start posting about those ‘Bad’ Tor nodes in Iran and Syria. Why do you think these are there ? What does it mean ? Let the flames begin!

    Future TODO
    a. OpenStreetMap
    I have started working on an OpenStreetMap implementation of the above using OpenLayers. The biggest hurdle is that OSM does not provide a server that serves map tiles over HTTPS. Makes me wonder…is that actually so difficult ?
    b. More stats
    I would like to add small graphs on how the number of nodes in each class evolves.

    Other Tor mapping efforts

    Don’t forget, you can always help Tor by running a node/bridge or sending some money to Tor or EFF!

    Review of the first Athens CryptoParty

    On Sunday the 11th of November we finally had our first CryptoParty in Athens, Greece. We hosted it at the Athens Hackerspace.

    We organized our first CryptoParty in a very ad-hoc way. A pad was set up and advertised on Twitter/Facebook. Almost immediately people started writing their thoughts, views and interests there. We soon had a list of topics that people were interested in and another list of people willing to give presentations/workshops. Later on we set up a doodle so people would choose the most convenient dates for them. From the group of 50 people that originally expressed their interest to attend the CryptoParty, at least 20 voted on the doodle. That’s how the final date of November the 11th was chosen.

    It was surprising/refreshing that even though everything was organized through an anonymously editable pad, nobody tried to vandalize it.

    The actual event
    Through the pad, we chose 3 topics for the first meeting. “Using SSL/TLS for your Internet communications”, an “introduction to Tor” and another “introduction to I2P”.
    The time for the event was set for 12:00 in the morning, probably a very bad choice. The next one should definitely be later in the afternoon or even night. We learn by our mistakes though…People started showing up at around 11:30, but the event didn’t start until 12:30 when someone from gave a 5′ intro talk about what the hackerspace is to people who had never been there before. People kept coming even until 13:00 and the audience had grown to more than 30 people.
    After the three workshops/presentations around 10-15 people stayed and we ordered pizza.

    All in all I’d say it was fairly successful since more than 30 people came and actually did things to improve their security.

    The presentations/workshops
    Using SSL/TLS for your Internet communications” (in English) was my effort to show people how cleartext data travels through the Internet and how any intermediate “bad guy”/LEA can easily read or manipulate your data. People were instructed to install wireshark so they could actually see for themselves what the actual problem is. It was very “nice” to see their surprise upon watching cleartext packets flowing through their network cards. It was even nicer to see their surprise when I used tcpdump on hackerspace’s router to redirect traffic to wireshark running on a Debian laptop to display their data, without having “direct” access to their computer. Then people were introduced to the idea of Transport Layer Security (SSL/TLS), and how HTTPS protects their web data from prying eyes. After this tiny “privacy apocalypse” it was very easy to convince users to install HTTPS-Everywhere. And so they did. Afterwards they got instructions on how they should change SSL/TLS settings for their E-email and IM clients.
    My original intention was to “scare” people a bit. It was funny to see their faces when they logged in to yahoo mail and they could see their emails cleartext on wireshark. People don’t understand how data travels through the Internet unless they experience it for themselves. I’m glad that people who had absolutely no idea about HTTPS are now using HTTPS-Everywhere to protect themselves. Hopefully they’ll show that to their friends as well.

    Introduction to Tor” (in Greek) gave people an idea at what anonymity is, how it differs from security and how users should be combining both TLS and Tor usage for security and anonymity at the same time. A brief explanation of what hidden services are was given as well. Even though George asked people to download and install Tor Browser Bundle and use it, we’ll definitely need more “hands on” Tor workshops in the future. It will be interesting to convince more people to actually use it and why not, even set up their own hidden services.

    Invisible Internet Project a.k.a. I2P” (in English) by @alafroiskiotos was probably the hardest of the three presentations to keep up for people that had no previous idea about anonymity networks. It’s unique architecture and some difficulties in it’s usage raised a lot of interesting questions by attendees.

    Thoughts on future CryptoParties
    After the end of the workshops/presentations we had a lengthy discussion with the attendees as to what they would like to see/experience in the future CryptoParties. Unfortunately people were not very vocal. Very few participated and openly expressed their thoughts/opinions. A great part of the discussion was spent trying to figure out whom should CryptoParty presentations/workshops target at, users? developers? geeks? It’s obviously very hard to target all groups of people at the same time.

    So here are my thoughts on what future CryptoParties should be. CryptoParties should be about changing user habits, they should be closer to workshops than presentations. They should be focused mainly on users not developers nor computer science students. Just simple users. People don’t want theoretical talks about cryptography, they need advice they can use in their daily lives. It’s already very hard to talk about modern crypto to people who haven’t got a strong mathematical background, you have to oversimplify things. Oversimplifying things then makes geeks/nerds unhappy and still doesn’t “teach” people about proper crypto. Even a fairly “simple” HTTPS negotiation contains key crypto concepts that are very difficult for a “crypto-newbie” to grasp. So it’s a lose-lose situation.

    We need to teach, or better convince, users on using good, secure, audited tools and not just tell them about technologies and concepts. We, weirdos, might like that, but most users don’t. People need our help to learn how to avoid “fancy” tools and false security prophets. We need to show them how security should be applied in a layered approach. Getting people to care about their own privacy is key to the success of CryptoParties in the way I see them. To achieve that, we, people that know a few things more than the average Joe, should all become volunteers to such efforts. We should be joining CryptoParties in order to help others and not in order to improve ourselves and our knowledge. (Actually when you study in order to make a good workshop/presentation you improve your own knowledge as well, but let’s leave that beside for now.) We can have our separate geeky/nerdy events to present fancy tech and cool crypto stuff, but let’s keep CryptoParties simple and practical. Oh and we’ll need to repeat things again and again and again. That’s the only way people might change their habits.

    If you want to find out more about the next Athens CryptoParty keep an eye at Hackerspace’s events and the athens cryptoparty pad. Join us!

    Good luck to all the CryptoParties worldwide!

    Bypassing censorship devices by obfuscating your traffic using obfsproxy

    *WARNING* 14/01/2014 This post is quite deprecated. For example obfsproxy has been completely rewritten in python and there is a newer and more secure replacement of obfs2, named obfs3. Please read this obfsproxy-debian-instructions for any updates.

    Some countries like China, Iran, Ethiopia, Kazakhstan and others, like installing some nasty little boxes at the edges of their country’s “internet feed” to monitor and filter traffic. These little boxes are called DPI (Deep Packet Inspection) boxes and what they do, is sniff out every little packet flowing through them to find specific patterns and then they provide their administrator with the option to block traffic that matches these patterns. These boxes are very sophisticated and they don’t just filter traffic by src, dst or port, they filter traffic by the content (payload) the packets carry.
    Unfortunately, it’s not just these countries that deploy DPI technologies, but some private companies also use such devices in order to monitor their employees.

    The 10 thousand feet view
    Tor is a nice way to avoid basic censorship technologies, but sometimes DPI technology is so good that it can fingerprint Tor traffic, which is already encrypted, and block it. In response to that, Tor people devised a technology called Pluggable Transports whose job is to obfuscate traffic in various ways so that it looks like something different than it actually is. For example it can make Tor traffic look like a skype call using SkypeMorph or one can use Obfsproxy to obfuscate traffic to look like…nothing, or at least nothing easily recognizable. What’s cool about obfsproxy though is that one can even use it separately from Tor, to obfuscate any connection he needs to.

    A warning
    Even though obfsproxy encrypts traffic and makes it look completely random, it’s not a fool proof solution for everything. It’s basic job is to defend against DPI that can recognize/fingerprint TLS connections. If someone has the resources he could potentially train his DPI box to “speak” the obfsproxy protocol and eventually decrypt the obfuscated traffic. What this means is that obfsproxy should not be used as a single means of protection and it should just be used as a wrapper _around_ already encrypted SSL traffic.
    If you’re still in doubt about what can obfsproxy protect you from and from what it can’t, please read the Obfsproxy Threat Model document.

    Two use cases
    Obfuscate an SSH and an OpenVPN connection.
    Obviously one needs a server outside the censorship perimeter that he or someone else will run the obfsproxy server part. Instructions on installing obfsproxy on Debian/Ubuntu are given in my previous blog post setting up tor + obfsproxy + brdgrd to fight censhorship. Installing netcat, the openbsd version; package name is netcat-openbsd on Debian/Ubuntu, is also needed for the SSH example.

    What both examples do is obfuscate a TLS connection through an obfsproxy server so that it looks innocent. Assuming that the most innocent looking traffic is HTTP, try running the obfsproxy server part on port 80.

    SSH connection
    USER: running ssh client
    HOST_A (obfsproxy): running obfsproxy on port 80 and redirecting to HOST_B port 22
    HOST_B (dst): Running SSH server on port 22

    What one needs to do is setup the following “tunneling”:
    ssh client —> [NC SOCKS PROXY] —> obfsproxy client (USER)—> obfsproxy server (HOST_A) —> ssh server (HOST_B)

    1. on HOST_A setup obfsproxy server to listen for connection and redirect to HOST_B:
    # screen obfsproxy --log-min-severity=info obfs2 --dest=HOST_B:22 server

    2. on USER’s box, then configure obfsproxy client to setup a local socks proxy that will obfuscate all traffic passing through it:
    $ screen obfsproxy --log-min-severity=info obfs2 socks
    Then instead of SSH-ing directly to HOST_B, the user has to ssh to HOST_A port 80 (where obfsproxy server is listening).

    3. on USER’s box again, edit ~/.ssh/config and add something along the following lines:

    Host HOST_A
        ProxyCommand /bin/nc.openbsd -x %h %p

    This will force all SSH connections to HOST_A to pass through the local (obfsproxy) socks server listening on

    4. Finally run the ssh command:
    $ ssh -p 80 username@HOST_A

    That’s it. The connection will now pass get obfuscated locally, pass through obfsproxy server at HOST_A and then finally reach it’s destination at HOST_B.

    OpenVPN connection
    USER: running OpenVPN client
    HOST_A (obfsproxy): running obfsproxy on port 80 and redirecting to HOST_B TCP port 443
    HOST_B (dst): Running OpenVPN server on port 443

    What one needs to do is setup the following “tunneling”:
    openvpn client —> obfsproxy client (USER)—> obfsproxy server (HOST_A) —> OpenVPN server (HOST_B)

    1. on HOST_A setup obfsproxy server to listen for connection and redirect to HOST_B:
    # screen obfsproxy --log-min-severity=info obfs2 --dest=HOST_B:443 server

    2. on USER’s box, then configure obfsproxy client to setup a local socks proxy that will obfuscate all traffic passing through it:
    $ screen obfsproxy --log-min-severity=info obfs2 socks
    Then instead of connecting the OpenVPN client directly to HOST_B, the user has edit OpenVPN config file to connect to HOST_A port 80 (where obfsproxy server is listening).

    3. on USER’s box again, edit your openvpn config file, change the ‘port’ and ‘remote’ lines and add a ‘socks-proxy’ one:

    port 80
    remote HOST_A
    socks-proxy 9999

    This will instruct the OpenVPN client to connect to HOST_A passing through the local (obfsproxy) socks server listening on

    4. Finally run the openvpn client command:
    $ openvpn client.config

    That’s it.

    Security Enhancement
    You can “enhance” obfproxy’s security by adding a shared secret parameter to command line, so anyone who doesn’t have this secret key won’t be able to use the obfsproxy server, decryption of packets will fail:
    # screen obfsproxy --log-min-severity=info obfs2 --shared-secret="foobarfoo" --dest=HOST_B:443 server
    $ screen obfsproxy --log-min-severity=info obfs2 --shared-secret="foobarfoo" socks

    Or at least…some documentation.

    Your best chance to understand the internals of obfsproxy is to read the protocol specification

    For more info about obfsproxy client part, read the documentation here: obfsproxy client external
    For more info about obfsproxy server part, read the documentation here: obfsproxy server external

    For those who like meaningless screenshots, here’s what wireshark (which is certainly NOT a DPI) can tell about a connection without and with obfsproxy:

    Without obfsproxy

    With obfsproxy

    one can find openvpn configuration files for use with obfsproxy here:
    Linux Client
    Windows Client

    setting up tor + obfsproxy + brdgrd to fight censhorship

    *WARNING* 14/01/2014 This post is quite deprecated. For example obfsproxy has been completely rewritten in python and there is a newer and more secure replacement of obfs2, named obfs3. Please read this obfsproxy-debian-instructions for any updates.

    *Updated* look at the bottom for list of changes

    This post is a simple guide to create a debian/ubuntu packages out of the latest versions of Tor, obfsproxy and brdgrd in order to setup a “special gateway” and help people who face censorship issues. Sharing some of your bandwidth helps a lot of people get back their freedom.

    I guess most people already know what Tor is, quoting from Tor’s website:

    Tor is a network of virtual tunnels that allows people and groups to improve their privacy and security on the Internet. It also enables software developers to create new communication tools with built-in privacy features. Tor provides the foundation for a range of applications that allow organizations and individuals to share information over public networks without compromising their privacy.


    obfsproxy is a tool that attempts to circumvent censorship, by transforming the Tor traffic between the client and the bridge. This way, censors, who usually monitor traffic between the client and the bridge, will see innocent-looking transformed traffic instead of the actual Tor traffic.


    brdgrd is short for “bridge guard”: A program which is meant to protect Tor bridges from being scanned (and as a result blocked) by the Great Firewall of China.

    Combining these to work together is quite easy if you follow this simple guide/howto.

    ////// Become root
    $ sudo su -
    ////// Get build tools/packages
    # cd /usr/src/
    # apt-get install build-essential libssl-dev devscripts git-core autoconf debhelper autotools-dev libevent-dev dpatch pkg-config
    # apt-get install hardening-includes asciidoc docbook-xml docbook-xsl xmlto
    # apt-get install screen libnetfilter-queue-dev
    ////// Get latest versions of tor/obfsproxy/brdgrd
    # git clone
    # git clone
    # git clone
    ////// Compile obfsproxy & create package
    # cd obfsproxy/
    # ./ 
    # debuild -uc -us 
    ////// Compile tor & create package
    # cd ../tor/
    # ./ 
    # debuild -uc -us 
    ////// Install packages
    ////// The following package versions might be different depending on your configuration. Change them appropriately by looking at the deb files in your path: ls *.deb
    # cd ..
    # dpkg -i tor-geoipdb_0.2.4.3-alpha-1_all.deb obfsproxy_0.1.4-2_amd64.deb tor_0.2.4.3-alpha-1_amd64.deb
    ////// Create Tor configuration
    # cat > /etc/tor/torrc << EOF 
    AvoidDiskWrites 1
    DataDirectory /var/lib/tor
    ServerTransportPlugin obfs2 exec /usr/bin/obfsproxy --managed
    Log notice file /var/log/tor/notices.log
    ## If you want to enable management port uncomment the following 2 lines and add a password
    ## ControlPort 9051
    ## HashedControlPassword 16:CHANGEME
    ## CHANGEME_1 -> provide a nickname for your bridge, can be anything you like.
    Nickname CHANGEME_1
    ## CHANGEME_2 -> How many KB/sec will you share. Don't be stingy! Try putting _at least_ 20 KB.
    RelayBandwidthRate CHANGEME_2 KB
    ## CHANGEME_3 -> Put a slightly higher value than your previous one. e.g if you put 500 on CHANGEME_2, put 550 on CHANGEME_3.
    RelayBandwidthBurst CHANGEME_3 KB
    ExitPolicy reject *:* 
    ## CHANGEME_4 -> If you want others to be able to contact you uncomment this line and put your GPG fingerprint for example.
    #ContactInfo CHANGEME_4
    ORPort 443 
    #ORPort [2001:db8:1234:5678:9012:3456:7890:1234]:443
    BridgeRelay 1
    ## CHANGEME_5 -> If you don't want to publish your bridge in BridgeDB, so you can privately share it with your friends uncomment the following line
    #PublishServerDescriptor 0
    ////// Restart Tor
    # /etc/init.d/tor restart
    ////// Compile and run brdgrd
    ////// If you've changed ORport in Tor config above, be sure to change the "--sport 443" port below as well
    ////// brdgrd does not help since obfsproxy is already running in front of the bridge, but won't hurt either.
    # cd brdgrd/
    # make
    # iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,ACK SYN,ACK --sport 443 -j NFQUEUE --queue-num 0
    ////// brdgrd Can't do IPv6 the next line is commented out
    ////// ip6tables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,ACK SYN,ACK --sport 443 -j NFQUEUE --queue-num 0
    ////// You can run brdgrd without root, just by setting some correct cap_net_admin rights
    ////// Instead of: screen -dmS brdgrd ./brdgrd -v
    $ sudo screen -dmS brdgrd setcap cap_net_admin=ep ./brdgrd -v
    # tail -f /var/log/tor/notices.log

    The above guide has been tested on Debian Squeeze and Ubuntu 12.04.

    That’s it. You just made the world a better place.

    I’ve made some changes to the post according to comments on the blog post and #tor-dev.
    a) Changed URLs for the git clone operations to https:// instead of git://
    b) Changed brdgrd git url to instead of github.
    c) Changed config sections of torrc file
    d) Added some more info on brdgrd

    Tor has published “official” instructions for setting up obfsproxy bridges on Debian boxes –> Setting up an Obfsproxy Bridge on Debian/Ubuntu

    Update sample config to inform about unpublished bridges.

    *Experimental* Chrome extension containing Greek HTTPS-Everywhere rules

    I’ve just uploaded an experimental version of HTTPS-Everywhere Google Chrome extension containing Greek rules.

    You can find it on https-everywhere-greek-rules downloads page on github.

    To install it, download the .crx from github, open Extensions Settings and drag the downloaded .crx on the Extensions page. It will prompt you to install it.

    After installation you can visit or to test it. You should be seeing a new icon on the left of the url bar to notify you that HTTPS-Everywhere applied some rules.

    I’ve tested it on Google Chrome Version 21 on Linux and it seems to work ok. If you have any problems open up an issue on github.

    Happy safer surfing…

    Greek rules for HTTPS Everywhere

    HTTPS Everywhere is a browser addon by EFF whose job is to redirect you to the HTTPS versions of certain, whitelisted, web sites. What this means is that HTTPS Everywhere protects your communication with those websites by forcing them to be encrypted.

    The current HTTPS Everywhere ruleset lacks any Greek websites, so I started yet-another-list to create rules for Greek websites. This is the fourth list I’m maintaing after GrRBL, Greek Spammers Blacklist and Greek AdblockPlus Filter rules and it is the only one where being included is actually a good thing.

    You can find some more info about Greek rules for HTTPS Everywhere on my github page.

    Until the rules get adopted upstream by HTTPS Everywhere team, in order to use them you should download the rules and place them inside your Firefox profile directory. But first of all you need to install the plugin/extension/addon/call-me-whatever-you-want by going to HTTPS Everywhere page.

    Step 1: Instructions for Linux users
    Go to the HTTPSEverywhereUserRules directory inside your firefox profile directory:

    $ cd .mozilla/firefox/XYZXYZXYZ.default/HTTPSEverywhereUserRules/
    (XYZXYZXYZ will be different in your machine)

    and download the current Greek ruleset:
    $ wget

    Step 1: Instructions for Windows users
    Download with your favorite browser.
    Then, according to this Mozilla support page, open Fifefox, go to Help->Troubleshooting Information and under the Application Basics section, click on Open Containing Folder. There a window will appear and you should copy the previously downloaded Greek.xml file inside the HTTPSEverywhereUserRules folder.

    Step 2: Instructions for any OS
    Either restart your browser to load the new rules or click the HTTPS Everywhere icon beside the url bar, select “Disable HTTPS Everywhere”, then click it again and select “Enable HTTPS Everywhere”. The new rules should now be loaded, you can test by going to and it should immediately redirect you to

    Some notes
    The ruleset is experimental. If you find any problems please report them as issues to github.
    If you want a Greek website added to the list, either report it as a new issue on github or fork the repository, add your own rules and open a pull request.

    A small rant
    I found some webmails in Greece that don’t even offer HTTPS as an option to the user. They ‘POST’ user details, including passwords of course, over unencrypted HTTP connections. I will be updating a text file called hallofshame.txt inside the github reposity of Greek rules for HTTPS Everywhere with such websites. I am planning to inform the operators of such websites every now and then, so if you know any other cases please open up new issues so we can help protect innocent users.

    A big rant on current HTTPS status of top Greek websites
    The status of HTTPS support on top 100 Greek websites (according to Alexa) is SAD. No wait, it is EXTEMELY SAD. Out of these 100 websites, taking into account only the ones that are actually run by Greeks, that means excluding Google, Facebook, Youtube, LinkedIn, etc, only 2, yes you read correctly, just two websites offer HTTPS support.
    The reason 95% the others don’t is probably because they are based on Akamai-zed services and either don’t have the money to buy Akamai’s HTTPS products or don’t have the technical skills to do it properly.

    If you don’t run an Akamai-zed website and want a completely free 1-year SSL certificate please visit If you need professional help with your setup please don’t hesitate to contact.

    There’s a very good (financial) explanation why these high traffic Greek sites have prefered Akamai’s services and haven’t deployed their own servers in Greece but this will be the content of another blog post coming soon.

    Η πρώτη απόφαση λήψης τεχνολογικών μέτρων παρεμπόδισης της πρόσβασης χρηστών σε ιστοσελίδες

    Από δελτίο τύπου του Οργανισμού Πνευματικής Ιδιοκτησίας:

    …στις 16 Μαΐου 2012 δημοσιεύθηκε η απόφαση 4658/2012 του Μονομελούς Πρωτοδικείου Αθηνών, η οποία έκανε δεκτό αίτημα οργανισμών συλλογικής διαχείρισης δικαιωμάτων επί μουσικών και οπτικοακουστικών έργων να υποχρεωθούν εκτός άλλων οι ελληνικές εταιρίες παροχής υπηρεσιών σύνδεσης στο διαδίκτυο να λάβουν τεχνολογικά μέτρα προκειμένου να καταστεί αδύνατη η πρόσβαση των συνδρομητών τους σε διαδικτυακές τοποθεσίες μέσω των οποίων πραγματοποιείται παράνομη παρουσίαση και ανταλλαγή έργων. Η απόφαση εφαρμόζει ουσιαστικά για πρώτη το άρθρο 64 Α του ν. 2121/1993 που ενσωματώνει πρόβλεψη Οδηγίας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για τη δυνατότητα λήψης ασφαλιστικών μέτρων κατά των διαμεσολαβητών (παρόχων υπηρεσιών διαδικτύου), οι υπηρεσίες των οποίων χρησιμοποιούνται από τρίτο για την προσβολή του δικαιώματος του δημιουργού ή συγγενικού δικαιώματος. Παρόμοιες αποφάσεις έχουν ήδη εκδοθεί σε άλλα κράτη μέλη της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και αποσκοπούν στην προστασία της πνευματικής ιδιοκτησίας στο διαδίκτυο χωρίς να θίγονται τα δικαιώματα των χρηστών….

    Την πλήρη απόφαση μπορείτε να την διαβάσετε εδώ: 4658/2012
    Επειδή το site του ΟΠΙ δεν παρέχει πια την απόφαση, την έχω ανεβάσει εδώ: Απόφαση-του-Πρωτοδικείου-Αθηνών-για-την-αντιμετώπιση-της-διαδικτυακής-πειρατείας

    Γιατί είναι σημαντική αυτή η απόφαση για τους χρήστες
    Για πρώτη φορά στην Ελλάδα δικαστήριο επιβάλλει συγκεκριμένα τεχνικά/τεχνολογικά μέτρα παρεμπόδισης της πρόσβασης χρηστών σε ιστοσελίδες/servers. Σήμερα μπορεί να είναι μια ιστοσελίδα που παρέχει “πειρατικό” περιεχόμενο και ο ιδιοκτήτης της βγάζει χρήματα μέσω των διαφημίσεων, αύριο μπορεί να είναι ένα site που ο ιδιοκτήτης του δεν βγάζει χρήματα και μεθαύριο ένα πολιτικό site, ένα θρησκευτικό site, ένα blog που διαφωνεί με τις μεθόδους μιας εταιρίας, μιας κυβέρνησης, κτλ. Οπότε πρέπει ως χρήστες να ξέρουμε τι επιβάλλει το δικαστήριο και να δούμε πως εμείς, ως μέλη της κοινωνίας του Internet, μπορούμε να κάνουμε κάτι για να ακυρώσουμε στην πράξη μια τέτοια απόφαση αν πιστεύουμε πως αυτή είναι λανθασμένη.

    Τι περιγράφει η απόφαση
    Η απόφαση περιέχει μια λεπτομερή τεχνική έκθεση που εξηγεί πως δουλεύει ένα site, ποια πρωτόκολλα χρησιμοποιούνται από τα μηχανήματα των χρηστών/πελατών για να αποκτήσουν πρόσβαση στο site και έπειτα περιγράφει τρόπους να διακοπεί η σύνδεση των χρηστών με ένα site. Οι τρόποι που παρουσιάζονται είναι οι εξής 2:
    Ι) Εφαρμογή κατάλληλων φίλτρων στους δρομολογητές (routers) των ISPs ώστε να αποκλειστεί οποιαδήποτε κίνηση καταλήγει σε συγκεκριμένη IP.
    ΙΙ) Εφαρμογή κατάλληλης ανακατεύθυνσης, μέσω τροποποίησης των DNS εγγραφών στους nameservers του κάθε ISP ώστε, ώστε τα αιτήματα προς συγκεκριμένα domains να καταλήγουν σε διαφορετικούς ιστοτόπους. Αυτοί οι ιστότοποι θα μπορούσαν να περιέχουν και ένα προειδοποιητικό μύνημα ώστε να καταλαβαίνουν οι χρήστες γιατί δεν έχουν πρόσβαση στο κανονικό site, όπως αναφέρει το η έκθεση.

    Από αυτούς τους 2 τρόπους, στην απόφαση επιβάλλεται η χρήση μόνο του τρόπου (I) ως τεχνολογικό μέτρο διακοπής της πρόσβασης στις “παραβατικές” ιστοσελίδες.

    Τα προβλήματα της απόφασης
    Τα προβλήματα της απόφασης για μένα είναι αρκετά. Κάποια αναφέρονται και στην ίδια την τεχνική έκθεση που περιέχεται στην απόφαση.
    Συγκεκριμένα αναφέρει:

    Αν και υπάρχουν δυνατότητες παράκαμψης των συγκεκριμένων τεχνικών μέσων από την μεριά των χρηστών του διαδυκτύου, οι τεχνικές αυτές είναι άγνωστες στη μεγάλη πλειονότητα των πελατών (συνδρομητών) των ISP, που είναι οι δυνητικοί επισκέπτες των ιστοτόπων στους οποίους έχει διακοπεί η πρόσβαση.

    Θα αναφερθώ μόνο στα πολύ βασικά όμως…
    α) Καταρχήν τα sites έχουν αλλάξει IPs. Το πλέον δεν δείχνει στην IP που αναφέρεται στην απόφαση, για την ακρίβεια δεν δείχνει πουθενά αυτή τη στιγμή, ενώ το λειτουργεί αλλά δείχνει σε διαφορετική IP. Άρα η εφαρμογή της οδηγίας (Ι) είναι πρακτικά άχρηστη ως προς τους σκοπούς της απόφασης χωρίς πολλά πολλά. Από την άλλη όμως μπορεί να δημιουργήσει προβλήματα πρόσβασης σε άλλα sites που μπορεί αυτή τη στιγμή να φιλοξενούνται σε εκείνες τις IP για τις οποίες πρέπει να μπουν φίλτρα. Άρα αν εφαρμοστεί η απόφαση ως έχει κινδυνεύει να διακοπεί η πρόσβαση στο site μιας ελληνικής ή ξένης εταιρίας ή προσώπου χωρίς να φταίει σε τίποτα! Ακόμα να μην είχαν αλλάξει IPs τα sites αυτά όμως, πάλι προκύπτει πρόβλημα. Η σύγχρονη τεχνολογία, των τελευταίων 15+ ετών, επιτρέπει την φιλοξενία πολλαπλών ιστοτόπων στην ίδια IP μέσω της τεχνολογίας virtual hosting, κάτι που εφαρμόζεται κατά κόρον ώστε να εξοικονομηθούν IPs. Αυτό έχει σαν αποτέλεσμα πως αν αποτραπεί η κίνηση προς μία συγκεκριμένη IP από ένα φίλτρο ενός ISP, τότε παρεμποδίζεται και η κίνηση προς όλα τα υπόλοιπα sites που φιλοξενούνται στην ίδια IP. Άρα υπάρχει πιθανότητα “τιμωρίας” αθώων ανθρώπων που δεν έχουν κάνει απολύτως τίποτα.

    β) Η τεχνική έκθεση και η απόφαση περιέχει συγκεκριμένα domains που θα πρέπει να εφαρμοστεί το (II). Αυτό όμως δεν εμποδίζει σε τίποτα τον διαχειριστή της “προβληματικής” ιστοσελίδας να αλλάξει αύριο domain κρατώντας ακριβώς το ίδιο περιεχόμενο. Οπότε εμποδίζοντας την πρόσβαση στους πελάτες πίσω από ένα ISP σε ένα συγκεκριμένο domain δεν καταφέρνεις και πολλά. Ακόμα όμως και να μην αλλάξει domain ο διαχειριστής μιας και υπάρχουν ελέυθεροι nameservers (Google Public DNS, OpenDNS, κ.α) στο Internet, το μόνο που θα είχε να κάνει ο χρήστης θα ήταν να χρησιμοποιήσει αυτούς έναντι των nameservers του ISP του. Άρα πάλι τα τεχνικά μέτρα είναι εντελώς ανεπαρκή ως προς τον σκοπό της απόφασης. Πέραν αυτού και λόγω της προτεινόμενης ανακατεύθυνσης που προτείνει η τεχνική έκθεση τίθεται και ένα θέμα ιδιωτικότητας σε περίπτωση που εφαρμοζόταν το μέτρο (ΙΙ). Λόγω της ανακατεύθυνσης όλοι οι πελάτες θα “πήγαιναν” σε μία νέα ιστοσελίδα που θα ήταν υπό τη διαχείριση (μάλλον?) του ISP, άρα ο ISP αποκτάει πολύ εύκολα πρόσβαση στο ποιός θέλει να επισκεφτεί τον ιστότοπο αυτό. Τίθεται λοιπόν ζήτημα παρακολούθησης της κίνησης των πελατών. Προσωπικά το θεωρώ απαράδεκτο, όπως απαράδεκτο είναι να προσπαθείς να αλλάξεις τον τρόπο που λειτουργεί το internet. Άλλωστε όπως έχει πει ο John Gilmore:

    The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it


    Το Δίκτυο ερμηνέυει τη λογοκρισία ως ζημιά και δρομολογεί (την κίνηση) γύρω από αυτό (ξεπερνώντας την ζημιά)

    Τι θα μπορούσαν να κάνουν οι χρήστες για να παρακάμψουν το “πρόβλημα” αν τους επηρέαζε
    Σε περίπτωση εφαρμογής του (II), όπως αναφέρθηκε παραπάνω το μόνο που θα είχαν να κάνουν οι χρήστες θα ήταν να αλλάξουν nameservers στο PC/δίκτυο τους. Αυτό εξηγείται αναλύτικά στις σελίδες της Google Public DNS αλλά και του OpenDNS. Τόσο απλά. Είναι υπόθεση 1 λεπτού αν έχει ο οποιοσδήποτε τις οδηγίες μπροστά του.

    Σε περίπτωση εφαρμογής της τεχνικής (Ι) και την στιγμή που το site δεν μπορεί για τους Χ λόγους να αλλάξει IP, αυτό που πρέπει να κάνουν οι χρήστες είναι να χρησιμοποιήσουν κάποιον proxy server, ένα VPN ή κάποιο άλλο δίκτυο που δρομολογεί διαφορετικά τις συνδέσεις τους, για παράδειγμα το Tor. Ο ευκολότερος τρόπος να βρει κάποιος δωρεάν proxies στο δίκτυο είναι να ψάξει στο Google, ενώ η αγορά ενός VPN ξεκινά από τα 3€. Η χρήση του tor είναι πλεόν αρκετά απλή και το μόνο που απαιτείται είναι να κατεβάσει κανείς το Tor Browser Bundle και να τρέξει το Vidalia. Όταν κάποιος τρέξει το Vidalia θα ανοίξει ένας νέος browser (Firefox) και έπειτα η δρομολόγηση των πακέτων προς το site που θέλει να επισκευτεί κανείς γίνεται μέσω του Tor δικτύου το οποίο είναι αρκετά δύσκολο να το σταματήσουν οι ISPs. Σίγουρα πάντως η απόφαση ασφαλιστικών μέτρων 4658/2012 δεν είναι ικανή να σταματήσει το Tor ή οποιονδήποτε άλλο από τους παραπάνω τρόπους παράκαμψης του “προβλήματος”.

    Τι πρέπει να γνωρίζουν οι χρήστες του Internet
    Οι χρήστες του internet πρέπει να γνωρίζουν πως ανά πάσα στιγμή μια τέτοια απόφαση μπορεί να τους αλλάξει τις συνήθειές τους αλλά και να τους κόψει την πρόσβαση από πηγές πληροφορίας που μέχρι τώρα είχαν ελεύθερη πρόσβαση. Για να μην βρεθούν τελευταία στιγμή να αναρωτιούνται τί και πώς πρέπει να φροντίζουν να ενημερώνονται για τους κινδύνους και τα προβλήματα. Είναι μάλιστα επιτακτικό ο ένας χρήστης να ενημερώνει τους άλλους. Γι αυτούς ακριβώς τους λόγους τους τελευταίους 2-3 μήνες έχει ξεκινήσει μια προσπάθεια ενημέρωσης των Ελλήνων χρηστών για τα ψηφιακά τους δικαιώματα, τους κινδύνους που υπάρχουν στο διαδίκτυο, πως προστατεύει κανείς τα προσωπικά του δεδομένα και πως αποφεύγει προσπάθειες εταιρικής ή κρατικής λογοκρισίας μέσω κάποιων παρουσιάσεων που γίνονται στο hackerspace της Αθήνας. Η επόμενη παρουσίαση γίνεται στις 30/05/2012 και αφορά την χρήση του δικτύου Tor. Όσοι ενδιαφέρονται είναι ευπρόσδεκτοι να έρθουν να ακούσουν και φυσικά να ρωτήσουν για τυχόν απορίες που ίσως έχουν σχετικά με την ψηφιακή τους ζωή.

    Αν σας ενδιαφέρει να παλέψετε και εσείς για τα ψηφιακά δικαιώματα και τις ελευθερίες στην Ελλάδα καλό θα ήταν να διαβάσετε το κείμενο θέσεων του Δικτύου για την Ψηφιακή Απελευθέρωση (Digital Liberation Network) και αν συμφωνείτε να εγγραφείτε στην mailing list του DLN.

    AthCon 2012 Review

    Alternate title: “Being a lamb around a pack of wolves” … A venue full of hackers that are eager to attack your systems…

    On 3-4/05/2012 the third AthCon conference was held in Athens. AthCon is an international security conference whose motto is “The First HIGHLY TECHNICAL Security Conference in Greece”.

    Even though I am not a security professional, my daily job title is “Systems and Services Engineer” which of course includes various aspects of security but I am certainly not a security researcher, I had decided months ago that I would be attending this year’s AthCon. Since I like messing a lot with IPv6 for the past 2-3 years, I decided that I could try and submit an introductory talk about IPv6 security issues. My talk was accepted, so I was not only attending AthCon this year but I was going to give a presentation as well.

    My presentation – Are you ready for IPv6 insecurities ? was during the first day of the conference. I am always worried when I give presentations on IPv6 that the people attending have probably no clue about this ‘not-so-new’ protocol. Most people think that IPv6 is like IPv4 with bigger addresses and ‘:’ instead of ‘.’ to separate the address groups, which is of course a HUGE mistake/misunderstanding. I was hopeful that this wouldn’t be the case in AthCon, so when I started my presentation and I asked the crowd ‘how many of you know what SLAAC is ?’ and I only saw 3-4 hands raised I kinda froze, I was expecting at least a double digit…I was going to give a presentation on IPv6 security concepts to people that have absolutely no idea what I’m talking about. Being prepared for the fact that some people would need some ‘refreshing’ on their IPv6 knowledge, I had prepared around 20 introductory slides explaining some IPv6 concepts before I entered the security details, but I doubt these were enough for most people there. I am hopeful though that some of the attendees might be motivated to read more about the protocol since I think my security slides contained enough details, references and links to get people started. If someone needs more details feel free to contact me.

    Enough with my presentation, what about other presentations ?
    My personal view is that this year’s AthCon had some great talks, some that were ok and some that I didn’t like. I won’t mention which ones I didn’t like, but I noticed that a LOT of people were gossiping about these in the hallways. I will only mention here the ones that I really liked.

    Day 1:
    “Packing Heat!” by Dimitrios Glynos
    A presentation that every pentester should download/watch somehow. Techniques about packing your executables to avoid detection by anti-virus programs, need I say more ? Great content and very well presented. Congrats Dimitris!

    “PostScript: Danger Ahead” by Andrei Costin
    How to use PostScript programming language to take advantage of Printers, OS, etc. Very interesting concepts were presented and also the examples/demos shown were pretty cool and easy to understand.

    Day 2:
    “Apple vs. Google Client Platforms” by Felix ‘FX’ Lindner
    I guess mostly everyone reading this blog knows FX and what a great speaker he is. If you don’t then start watching his previous presentations and start reading about his work. His presentation at AthCon, apart from being the best one in terms of “presenting it”, was also extremely interesting. He connected the security concepts behind Apple’s iOS and Google’s Chromebook with their business tactics and policies. Just wait for AthCon to publish the videos and watch it. Probably the best talk at AthCon 2012.

    “Advances in BeEF: RESTful API, WebSockets, XssRays enhancements” by Michele Orru
    Jaw-dropping. That’s all I have to say about BeEF. Scary. Watch it to see what browsers and IDS have to face and defend against…not in the future but right now.

    “Exploitation and state machines” by Halvar Flake
    This presentation was about exploitation techniques and why automated exploitation engines don’t work that well. Even though reversing and exploitation is far from my interest topics I enjoyed the talk a lot. Very well structured and very clear points. Too bad this talk did not appear on the schedule and was there as “tbc”, I am sure many more people would come just to listen to this talk and speak to Halvar.

    If I were to suggest a couple of things for next year…
    a) Please put the CTF in separate slots within the day, not at the same time with the presentations. In a conference of 150-200 people (just guessing here) having 30+ people leaving the presentation room and just attending the CTF all day long leaves the main room a bit empty. I am pretty sure there were people that wanted to attend both the presentations and the CTF, unfortunately they had to make a choice.
    b) Send some details/info to the speakers about the conference a few days earlier. Maybe non-greek presenters were given but we weren’t, at least I wasn’t.
    c) The venue is really nice, but maybe it would help if the next AthCon was organized somewhere downtown. Yeah I can understand that the cost would be higher but number of people attending would also raise (I think).
    d) Give us even more highly technical presentations/speakers! People starve for these kind of talks!

    My congratulations fly to AthCon people for organizing the conference. See you next year!

    You can find some of the pics I took from the speakers at: AthCon 2012 speaker pics (if any of the speakers wants his pic removed please contact me ASAP)