Hi!

Has anyone else experienced 'bad packet' errors when decoding
conventional (in my cases CAST) encrypted replies from panta?

Example:

Reply block chain (pantanym -) borked - deuxpi - dingo -> a.a.m.,
each with 'Encrypt-CAST'. After 3 successful decryption steps I get
messages, which have to be corrupted somewhere between panta and
borked:

Version: N/A

[...snip...]
 WIXZ4emZUwL0nmhrmpM9d7ApkP9f7HtbrcOd61DO
96lCVd5B1LUhaCa2Xo3ABvYd
7r
nn2w0hmoJ+Y99
aX8ifh+ct0Bo7Ut2awJmw5WrcP4WHoc/xljLc
97X6TubQK
 RrYwnEz73GIIJBFHMUXw0hIDuckLt7hczW55h6gV
Q
i0G6ih4Sw5ivoLpZPLwr/f/+z1Kq9IKtQGNw+Qy/DglC5aEWOMHR/l9vcTW1BCjpSNmNrZosz27M
7If6ZKZnRRcM
tl4T/jvbqrAbxGI5lcSBKp6xfMZ/odTQ1oC3xLjU8FM2lCpqLpGvC2OxOFZNSl7P
[...snip...]
 VuKIO53eXaqKWJeJ0j7sPGwrV2H6c8N42ncNGslD
bxuroEZSnLOc+P2IiMaqgnfv
 CT2MpydBMwoZ6NdYchKMaGmxuF7jMi7ls62RVAIJ
gLEd669Rgxyebu8EJhGXt70
mPlre5FxoROjaY3qnqy+Gpxm/ SSDQipOC2s2d01P7PASKwT0BmHNhE8U7Dmj8dYVm

 dYDd9wbxebKvKwGyAvGAJ07qxYpuXtGetwpeJi8e
AhSr4YjfKFyoIsuhDjwPN8QU
[...snip...]
A1NX3+c/ YR3Ltdz+CxMy+WKN3TAIQcIg0PvhmBnhFn3x5wb8
+LOdDBH7uNefBhgb
 lCyAMdlgmm3JKqydTbp101V95xVhfJ3iDo0rV3CF
s5ADGmhTl0m7G6P3f7x9C4w3UVpscojhagCK
 5DoZI9lazJkDzr1dLA+PMi+hwxCtesFVZelETag9
NOd5IlgynFudu
SdVBNBX3zcZZxhWReLNnLGzCSc4EQV/ckizwVGa6Rx7k5giMCANqv4h8o9NgdoSE
[...snip...]
YZqqy81KTKiEZu6nj/ FBebxHaKTxLGsFpwvlgfAz8DLZVtJPiHkYCJQori
ZHc9bR
C9RPU/3lK2TZiNuVWP1ddebm5jc=
=osGV-----END PGP MESSAGE-----

Regards

Christian
--
OmniMix .. protect your privacy
http://www.danner-net.de/om.htm

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On 9 Nov 2006 13:07:14 -0000
Christian Danner <---@---.---> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> Has anyone else experienced 'bad packet' errors when decoding
> conventional (in my cases CAST) encrypted replies from panta?
>
> 2 examples:
>
> Reply block chain (pantanym -) borked - deuxpi - dingo -> a.a.m.,
> each with 'Encrypt-CAST'. After 3 successful decryption steps I get
> messages, which have to be corrupted somewhere between panta and
> borked:

Maybe I'm not understanding you correctly, does the 'bad packet' error refer
 to
the conventional encryption steps, or the final step when the message is
decoded using your own key? I've had the latter problem before, and solved i
t
by switching to GnuPG, which while reporting there was an error did decrypt 
it,
whereas PGP would just report the error and stall.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

>Maybe I'm not understanding you correctly, does the 'bad packet' error refer to
>the conventional encryption steps, or the final step when the message is
>decoded using your own key? I've had the latter problem before, and solved 
it
>by switching to GnuPG, which while reporting there was an error did decrypt
 it,
>whereas PGP would just report the error and stall.

No, the 'Encrypt-CAST' coded messages coming from panta's nym server,
which I get after several symmetric decoding steps, include lines with
a length that deviates from the 64 character norm, which isn't
correct. Trying to decode it I get a too short '-BEGIN / END PGP
MESSAGE-' block followed by a section introduced by '-BEGIN GARBAGE-'.

So it's no problem with the decoding algorithm, but, if not a faulty
encryption, which IMHO is unlikely, may point to some corruption
during the transport from the nym server to the first (external) cpunk
remailer.

Regards

Christian
--
OmniMix .. protect your privacy
http://www.danner-net.de/om.htm

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Christian Danner <---@---.---> wrote in message <UQ88RHPN39031.9542824074@an
onymous.poster>
 
>
> No, the 'Encrypt-CAST' coded messages coming from panta's nym server,
> which I get after several symmetric decoding steps, include lines with
> a length that deviates from the 64 character norm, which isn't
> correct. Trying to decode it I get a too short '-BEGIN / END PGP
> MESSAGE-' block followed by a section introduced by '-BEGIN GARBAGE-'.
>
> So it's no problem with the decoding algorithm, but, if not a faulty
> encryption, which IMHO is unlikely, may point to some corruption
> during the transport from the nym server to the first (external) cpunk
> remailer.
>
I'm simply getting no replies/server acks at all, even for messages that
I have observed appearing on Usenet -- if not a broken reply block
(always a possibility, although the remailer[s] involved haven't
reported a recent key change) I wonder if there's something up at Panta?
The daily stats in alt.privacy.anon-server.stats haven't been showing up
either, and the stats I checked on the website were dated 9 November....
--
Igenlode Wordsmith                        *latest review 3 Nov 2006*

My IMDb film reviews:  http://imdb.com/user/ur1448185/comments
ratings:  http://uk.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=3145804

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Right, now it's completely suspended and doesn't allow further
testings.

Regards

Christian
--
OmniMix .. protect your privacy
http://www.danner-net.de/om.htm

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On 9 Nov 2006 13:07:14 -0000
Christian Danner <---@---.---> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> Has anyone else experienced 'bad packet' errors when decoding
> conventional (in my cases CAST) encrypted replies from panta?
>
> 2 examples:
>
> Reply block chain (pantanym -) borked - deuxpi - dingo -> a.a.m.,
> each with 'Encrypt-CAST'. After 3 successful decryption steps I get
> messages, which have to be corrupted somewhere between panta and
> borked:

Maybe I'm not understanding you correctly, does the 'bad packet' error refer
 to
the conventional encryption steps, or the final step when the message is
decoded using your own key? I've had the latter problem before, and solved i
t
by switching to GnuPG, which while reporting there was an error did decrypt 
it,
whereas PGP would just report the error and stall.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On 11 Nov 2006 04:54:10 -0000
Christian Danner <---@---.---> wrote:

> No, the 'Encrypt-CAST' coded messages coming from panta's nym server,
> which I get after several symmetric decoding steps, include lines with
> a length that deviates from the 64 character norm, which isn't
> correct. Trying to decode it I get a too short '-BEGIN / END PGP
> MESSAGE-' block followed by a section introduced by '-BEGIN GARBAGE-'.
>
> So it's no problem with the decoding algorithm, but, if not a faulty
> encryption, which IMHO is unlikely, may point to some corruption
> during the transport from the nym server to the first (external) cpunk
> remailer.
>

Hi Christian

I tested my pantanyms, and had no problem with two Encrypt-Key reply blocks,
still waiting for some 'tests' to come back, as panta is being a bit slow at
the moment.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi !

On 10 Nov 2006, Christian Danner <---@---.---> wrote:
>Hi!
>
>Has anyone else experienced 'bad packet' errors when decoding
>conventional (in my cases CAST) encrypted replies from panta?
>
>2 examples:
>
>Reply block chain (pantanym -) borked - deuxpi - dingo -> a.a.m.,
>each with 'Encrypt-CAST'. After 3 successful decryption steps I get
>messages, which have to be corrupted somewhere between panta and
>borked:

I am investigating, please bear with me !

Sorry,
panta-admin

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iQA/AwUBRVd/ M9crLUqmoDLIEQJjnQCg7CerO3U31jF+ALNb7RIo
5Y1fgO0AoITO
zMdjJ3sb8TrIZpT418dtFeoe
=ulgs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown.  Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
for abuse and hashcash info.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Hi panta-admin!

Thanks for your efforts. I just got 2 correct replies to an account
creation request that was received / processed by your nym server 2
days ago (2 out of 3 reply blocks made it up to now, each with 4
symmetric and 1 asymmetric encryption layer and an overall-latency
target of less than an hour). So if not solved yet, it may be some
intermittent problem. Testing's a bit difficult with that much
latency.

@Anonymous: Thanks for your info.

Kind regards

Christian
--
OmniMix .. protect your privacy
http://www.danner-net.de/om.htm

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Hi panta-admin!

Maybe I found the cause of that problem. All nym accounts concerned
had the 'FixedSize' flag set. Smaller messages pass without trouble,
the fragmented ones seem to get crushed with the first symmetric
encryption. Is it possible that the handling of several 'partial' MIME
messages overstretches the symmetric encryption device of the nym
server?

Kind regards

Christian
--
OmniMix .. protect your privacy
http://www.danner-net.de/om.htm

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]