The Fantasyland Institute of Learning is the organisation behind Lambdaconf, a functional programming conference perhaps best known for standing behind a racist they had invited as a speaker. The fallout of that has resulted in them trying to band together events in order to reduce disruption caused by sponsors or speakers declining to be associated with conferences that think inviting racists is more important than the comfort of non-racists, which is weird in all sorts of ways but not what I'm talking about here because they've also written a "Code of Professionalism" which is like a Code of Conduct except it protects abusers rather than minorities and no really it is genuinely as bad as it sounds.

The first thing you need to know is that the document uses its own jargon. Important here are the concepts of active and inactive participation - active participation is anything that you do within the community covered by a specific instance of the Code, inactive participation is anything that happens anywhere ever (ie, active participation is a subset of inactive participation). The restrictions based around active participation are broadly those that you'd expect in a very weak code of conduct - it's basically "Don't be mean", but with some quirks. The most significant is that there's a "Don't moralise" provision, which as written means saying "I think people who support slavery are bad" in a community setting is a violation of the code, but the description of discrimination means saying "I volunteer to mentor anybody from a minority background" could also result in any community member not from a minority background complaining that you've discriminated against them. It's just not very good.

Inactive participation is where things go badly wrong. If you engage in community or professional sabotage, or if you shame a member based on their behaviour inside the community, that's a violation. Community sabotage isn't defined and so basically allows a community to throw out whoever they want to. Professional sabotage means doing anything that can hurt a member's professional career. Shaming is saying anything negative about a member to a non-member if that information was obtained from within the community.

So, what does that mean? Here are some things that you are forbidden from doing:

• If a member says something racist at a conference, you are not permitted to tell anyone who is not a community member that this happened (shaming)
  
• If a member tries to assault you, you are not allowed to tell the police (shaming)
  
• If a member gives a horribly racist speech at another conference, you are not allowed to suggest that they shouldn't be allowed to speak at your event (professional sabotage)
  
• If a member of your community reports a violation and no action is taken, you are not allowed to warn other people outside the community that this is considered acceptable behaviour (community sabotage)

Now, clearly, some of these are unintentional - I don't think the authors of this policy would want to defend the idea that you can't report something to the police, and I'm sure they'd be willing to modify the document to permit this. But it's indicative of the mindset behind it. This policy has been written to protect people who are accused of doing something bad, not to protect people who have something bad done to them.

There are other examples of this. For instance, violations are not publicised unless the verdict is that they deserve banishment. If a member harasses another member but is merely given a warning, the victim is still not permitted to tell anyone else that this happened. The perpetrator is then free to repeat their behaviour in other communities, and the victim has to choose between either staying silent or warning them and risk being banished from the community for shaming.

If you're an abuser then this is perfect. You're in a position where your victims have to choose between their career (which will be harmed if they're unable to function in the community) and preventing the same thing from happening to others. Many will choose the former, which gives you far more freedom to continue abusing others. Which means that communities adopting the Fantasyland code will be more attractive to abusers, and become disproportionately populated by them.

I don't believe this is the intent, but it's an inevitable consequence of the priorities inherent in this code. No matter how many corner cases are cleaned up, if a code prevents you from saying bad things about people or communities it prevents people from being able to make informed choices about whether that community and its members are people they wish to associate with. When there are greater consequences to saying someone's racist than them being racist, you're fucking up badly.

comments

Following the post about 10-bit Y'CbCr earlier this week, I thought I'd make an actual test of 10-bit H.264 compression for live streaming. The basic question is; sure, it's better-per-bit, but it's also slower, so it is better-per-MHz? This is largely inspired by Ronald Bultje's post about streaming performance, where he largely showed that HEVC is currently useless for live streaming from software; unless you can encode at x264's veryslow preset (which, at 720p60, means basically rather simple content and 20 cores or so), the best x265 presets you can afford will give you worse quality than the best x264 presets you can afford. My results will maybe not be as scientific, but hopefully still enlightening. I used the same test clip as Ronald, namely a two-minute clip of Tears of Steel. Note that this is an 8-bit input, so we're not testing the effects of 10-bit input; it's just testing the increased internal precision in the codec. Since my focus is practical streaming, I ran the last version of x264 at four threads (a typical desktop machine), using one-pass encoding at 4000 kbit/sec. Nageru's speed control has 26 presets to choose from, which gives pretty smooth steps between neighboring ones, but I've been sticking to the ten standard x264 presets (ultrafast, superfast, veryfast, faster, fast, medium, slow, slower, veryslow, placebo). Here's the graph: The x-axis is seconds used for the encode (note the logarithmic scale; placebo takes 200 250 times as long as ultrafast). The y-axis is SSIM dB, so up and to the left is better. The blue line is 8-bit, and the red line is 10-bit. (I ran most encodes five times and averaged the results, but it doesn't really matter, due to the logarithmic scale.) The results are actually much stronger than I assumed; if you run on (8-bit) ultrafast or superfast, you should stay with 8-bit, but from there on, 10-bit is on the Pareto frontier. Actually, 10-bit veryfast (18.187 dB) is better than 8-bit medium (18.111 dB), while being four times as fast! But not all of us have a relation to dB quality, so I chose to also do a test that maybe is a bit more intuitive, centered around bitrate needed for constant quality. I locked quality to 18 dBm, ie., for each preset, I adjusted the bitrate until the SSIM showed 18.000 dB plus/minus 0.001 dB. (Note that this means faster presets get less of a speed advantage, because they need higher bitrate, which means more time spent entropy coding.) Then I measured the encoding time (again five times) and graphed the results: x-axis is again seconds, and y-axis is bitrate needed in kbit/sec, so lower and to the left is better. Blue is again 8-bit and red is again 10-bit. If the previous graph was enough to make me intrigued, this is enough to make me excited. In general, 10-bit gives 20-30% lower bitrate for the same quality and CPU usage! (Compare this with the supposed up to 50% benefits of HEVC over H.264, given infinite CPU usage.) The most dramatic example is when comparing the medium presets directly, where 10-bit runs at 2648 kbit/sec versus 3715 kbit/sec (29% lower bitrate!) and is only 5% slower. As one progresses towards the slower presets, the gap is somewhat narrowed (placebo is 27% slower and only 24% lower bitrate), but in the realistic middle range, the difference is quite marked. If you run 3 Mbit/sec at 10-bit, you get the quality of 4 Mbit/sec at 8-bit. So is 10-bit H.264 a no-brainer? Unfortunately, no; the client hardware support is nearly nil. Not even Skylake, which can do 10-bit HEVC encoding in hardware (and 10-bit VP9 decoding), can do 10-bit H.264 decoding in hardware. Worse still, mobile chipsets generally don't support it. There are rumors that iPhone 6s supports it, but these are unconfirmed; some Android chips support it, but most don't. I guess this explains a lot of the limited uptake; since it's in some ways a new codec, implementers are more keen to get the full benefits of HEVC instead (even though the licensing situation is really icky). The only ones I know that have really picked it up as a distribution format is the anime scene, and they're feeling quite specific pains due to unique content (large gradients giving pronounced banding in undithered 8-bit). So, 10-bit H.264: It's awesome, but you can't have it. Sorry :-)

Must be the irony of life that I was about to give up the TclCurl Debian package some time ago, and now I'm using it again for some very old and horrible web scraping code. The world moved on to https but the Tcl http package only supports unencrypted http. You can combine it with the tls package as explained in the Wiki, but that seems to be overly complicated compared to just loading the TclCurl binding and moving on with something like this:

package require TclCurl
# download to a variable
curl::transfer -url https://sven.stormbind.net -bodyvar page
# or store it in a file
curl::transfer -url https://sven.stormbind.net -file page.html

Now the remaining problem is that the code is unmaintained upstream and there is one codebase on bitbucket and one on github. While I fed patches to the bitbucket repo and thus based the Debian package on that repo, the github repo diverted in a different direction.

Looks like it is time to change all the passwords again. There s a tiny little flaw in a CDN used everywhere, it seems. Here s a quick hack for users of the pass password manager to qickly find the domains affected. It is not perfect, but it is fast. :) Update: The previous example used parallel. Actually, I didn t need that. Turns out, using grep correctly is much faster than using grep the wrong way. Lession: Read the manual. :)

In previous articles, we have looked at how to generate passwords and did a review of various password managers. There is, however, a third way of managing passwords other than remembering them or encrypting them in a "vault", which is what I call "password hashing". A password hasher generates site-specific passwords from a single master password using a cryptographic hash function. It thus allows a user to have a unique and secure password for every site they use while requiring no storage; they need only to remember a single password. You may know these as "deterministic or stateless password managers" but I find the "password manager" phrase to be confusing because a hasher doesn't actually store any passwords. I do not think password hashers represent a good security tradeoff so I generally do not recommend their use, unless you really do not have access to reliable storage that you can access readily. In this article, I use the word "password" for a random string used to unlock things, but "token" to represent a generated random string that the user doesn't need to remember. The input to a password hasher is a password with some site-specific context and the output from a password hasher is a token.

What is a password hasher? A password hasher uses the master password and a label (generally the host name) to generate the site-specific password. To change the generated password, the user can modify the label, for example by appending a number. Some password hashers also have different settings to generate tokens of different lengths or compositions (symbols or not, etc.) to accommodate different site-specific password policies. The whole concept of password hashers relies on the concept of one-way cryptographic hash functions or key derivation functions that take an arbitrary input string (say a password) and generate a unique token, from which it is impossible to guess the original input string. Password hashers are generally written as JavaScript bookmarklets or browser plugins and have been around for over a decade. The biggest advantage of password hashers is that you only need to remember a single password. You do not need to carry around a password manager vault: there's no "state" (other than site-specific settings, which can be easily guessed). A password hasher named Master Password makes a compelling case against traditional password managers in its documentation:

It's as though the implicit assumptions are that everybody backs all of their stuff up to at least two different devices and backups in the cloud in at least two separate countries. Well, people don't always have perfect backups. In fact, they usually don't have any.

It goes on to argue that, when you lose your password: "You lose everything. You lose your own identity." The stateless nature of password hashers also means you do not need to use cloud services to synchronize your passwords, as there is (generally, more on that later) no state to carry around. This means, for example, that the list of accounts that you have access to is only stored in your head, and not in some online database that could be hacked without your knowledge. The downside of this is, of course, that attackers do not actually need to have access to your password hasher to start cracking it: they can try to guess your master key without ever stealing anything from you other than a single token you used to log into some random web site. Password hashers also necessarily generate unique passwords for every site you use them on. While you can also do this with password managers, it is not an enforced decision. With hashers, you get distinct and strong passwords for every site with no effort.

The problem with password hashers If hashers are so great, why would you use a password manager? Programs like LessPass and Master Password seem to have strong crypto that is well implemented, so why isn't everyone using those tools? Password hashing, as a general concept, actually has serious problems: since the hashing outputs are constantly compromised (they are sent in password forms to various possibly hostile sites), it's theoretically possible to derive the master password and then break all the generated tokens in one shot. The use of stronger key derivation functions (like PBKDF2, scrypt, or HMAC) or seeds (like a profile-specific secret) makes those attacks much harder, especially if the seed is long enough to make brute-force attacks infeasible. (Unfortunately, in the case of Password Hasher Plus, the seed is derived from Math.random() calls, which are not considered cryptographically secure.) Basically, as stated by Julian Morrison in this discussion:

A password is now ciphertext, not a block of line noise. Every time you transmit it, you are giving away potential clues of use to an attacker. [...] You only have one password for all the sites, really, underneath, and it's your secret key. If it's broken, it's now a skeleton-key [...]

Newer implementations like LessPass and Master Password fix this by using reasonable key derivation algorithms (PBKDF2 and scrypt, respectively) that are more resistant to offline cracking attacks, but who knows how long those will hold? To give a concrete example, if you would like to use the new winner of the password hashing competition (Argon2) in your password manager, you can patch the program (or wait for an update) and re-encrypt your database. With a password hasher, it's not so easy: changing the algorithm means logging in to every site you visited and changing the password. As someone who used a password hasher for a few years, I can tell you this is really impractical: you quickly end up with hundreds of passwords. The LessPass developers tried to facilitate this, but they ended up mostly giving up. Which brings us to the question of state. A lot of those tools claim to work "without a server" or as being "stateless" and while those claims are partly true, hashers are way more usable (and more secure, with profile secrets) when they do keep some sort of state. For example, Password Hasher Plus records, in your browser profile, which site you visited and which settings were used on each site, which makes it easier to comply with weird password policies. But then that state needs to be backed up and synchronized across multiple devices, which led LessPass to offer a service (which you can also self-host) to keep those settings online. At this point, a key benefit of the password hasher approach (not keeping state) just disappears and you might as well use a password manager. Another issue with password hashers is choosing the right one from the start, because changing software generally means changing the algorithm, and therefore changing passwords everywhere. If there was a well-established program that was be recognized as a solid cryptographic solution by the community, I would feel more confident. But what I have seen is that there are a lot of different implementations each with its own warts and flaws; because changing is so painful, I can't actually use any of those alternatives. All of the password hashers I have reviewed have severe security versus usability tradeoffs. For example, LessPass has what seems to be a sound cryptographic implementation, but using it requires you to click on the icon, fill in the fields, click generate, and then copy the password into the field, which means at least four or five actions per password. The venerable Password Hasher is much easier to use, but it makes you type the master password directly in the site's password form, so hostile sites can simply use JavaScript to sniff the master password while it is typed. While there are workarounds implemented in Password Hasher Plus (the profile-specific secret), both tools are more or less abandoned now. The Password Hasher homepage, linked from the extension page, is now a 404. Password Hasher Plus hasn't seen a release in over a year and there is no space for collaborating on the software the homepage is simply the author's Google+ page with no information on the project. I couldn't actually find the source online and had to download the Chrome extension by hand to review the source code. Software abandonment is a serious issue for every project out there, but I would argue that it is especially severe for password hashers. Furthermore, I have had difficulty using password hashers in unified login environments like Wikipedia's or StackExchange's single-sign-on systems. Because they allow you to log in with the same password on multiple sites, you need to choose (and remember) what label you used when signing in. Did I sign in on stackoverflow.com? Or was it stackexchange.com? Also, as mentioned in the previous article about password managers, web-based password managers have serious security flaws. Since more than a few password hashers are implemented using bookmarklets, they bring all of those serious vulnerabilities with them, which can range from account name to master password disclosures. Finally, some of the password hashers use dubious crypto primitives that were valid and interesting a decade ago, but are really showing their age now. Stanford's pwdhash uses MD5, which is considered "cryptographically broken and unsuitable for further use". We have seen partial key recovery attacks against MD5 already and while those do not allow an attacker to recover the full master password yet (especially not with HMAC-MD5), I would not recommend anyone use MD5 in anything at this point, especially if changing that algorithm later is hard. Some hashers (like Password Hasher and Password Plus) use a a single round of SHA-1 to derive a token from a password; WPA2 (standardized in 2004) uses 4096 iterations of HMAC-SHA1. A recent US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) report also recommends "at least 10,000 iterations of the hash function".

Conclusion Forced to suggest a password hasher, I would probably point to LessPass or Master Password, depending on the platform of the person asking. But, for now, I have determined that the security drawbacks of password hashers are not acceptable and I do not recommend them. It makes my password management recommendation shorter anyway: "remember a few carefully generated passwords and shove everything else in a password manager". [Many thanks to Daniel Kahn Gillmor for the thorough reviews provided for the password articles.]

Note: this article first appeared in the Linux Weekly News. Also, details of my research into password hashers are available in the password hashers history article.

For those who haven t heard, I ve been appointed as the new Executive Director of the GNOME Foundation, and I started last week on the 15th February. It s been an interesting week so far, mainly meeting lots of people and trying to get up to speed with what looks like an enormous job! However, I m thoroughly excited by the opportunity and am very grateful for everyone s warm words of welcome so far. One of the main things I m here to do is to try and help. GNOME is strong because of its community. It s because of all of you that GNOME can produce world leading technologies and a desktop that is intuitive, clean and functional. So, if you re stuck with something, or if there s a way that either myself or the Foundation can help, then please speak up! Additionally, I intend on making this blog a much more frequently updated one letting people know what I m doing, and highlighting cool things that are happening around the project. In that vein, this week I ve also started contacting all our fantastic Advisory Board members. I m also looking at finding sponsors for GUADEC and GNOME.Asia, so if you know of anyone, let me know! I also booked my travel to the GTK+ hackfest and to LibrePlanet if you re going to either of those, make sure you come and introduce yourself :) Finally, a small advertisement for Friends of GNOME. Your generosity really does help the Foundation support development of GNOME. Join up today!

Before I start, I would like to point out #855549 . This is a normal/wishlist bug I have filed against apt, the command-line package manager. I sincerely believe having a history command to know what packages were installed, which were upgraded, which were purged should be easily accessible, easily understood and if the output looks pretty, so much the better. Of particular interest to me is having a list of new packages I have installed in last couple of years after jessie became the stable release. It probably would make for some interesting reading. I dunno how much efforts would be to code something like that, but if it works, it would be the greatest. Apt would have finally arrived. Not that it s a bad tool, it s just that it would then make for a heck of a useful tool. Coming back to the topic on hand, Now for the last couple of weeks we don t have water or rather pressure of water. Water crisis has been hitting Pune every year since 2014 with no end in sight. This has been reported in newspapers addendum but it seems it has been felling on deaf ears. The end result of it is that I have to bring buckets of water from around 50 odd metres. It s not a big thing, it s not like some women in some villages in Rajasthan who have to walk in between 200 metres to 5 odd kilometres to get potable water or Darfur, Western Sudan where women are often kidnapped and sold as sexual slaves when they get to fetch water. The situation in Darfur has been shown quite vividly in Darfur is Dying . It is possible that I may have mentioned about Darfur before. While unfortunately the game is in flash as a web resource, the most disturbing part is that the game is extremely depressing, there is a no-win scenario. So knowing and seeing both those scenarios, I can t complain about 50 metres. BUT .but when you extrapolate the same data over some more or less 3.3-3.4 million citizens, 3.1 million during 2011 census with a conservative 2.3-2.4 percent population growth rate according to scroll.in. Fortunately or unfortunately, Pune Municipal Corporation elections were held today. Fortunately or unfortunately, this time all the political parties bought majorly unknown faces in these elections. For e.g. I belong to ward 14 which is spread over quite a bit of area and has around 10k of registered voters. Now the unfortunate part of having new faces in elections, you don t know anything about them. Apart from the affidavits filed, the only thing I come to know is whether there are criminal cases filed against them and what they have shown as their wealth. While I am and should be thankful to ADR which actually is the force behind having the collated data made public. There is a lot of untold story about political push-back by all the major national and regional political parties even when this bit of news were to be made public. It took major part of a decade for such information to come into public domain. But for my purpose of getting clean air and water supply 24 7 to each household seems a very distant dream. I tried to connect with the corporators about a week before the contest and almost all of the lower party functionaries hid behind their political parties manifestos stating they would do the best without any viable plan. For those not knowing, India has been blessed with 6 odd national parties and about 36 odd regional parties and every election some 20-25 new parties try their luck every time. The problem is we, the public, don t trust them or their manifestos. First of all the political parties themselves engage in mud-slinging as to who s copying whom with the manifesto.Even if a political party wins the elections, there is no *real* pressure for them to follow their own manifesto. This has been going for many a year. OF course, we the citizens are to also blame as most citizens for one reason or other chose to remain aloof of the process. I scanned/leafed through all the manifestos and all of them have the vague-wording we will make Pune tanker-free without any implementation details. While I was unable to meet the soon-to-be-Corporators, I did manage to meet a few of the assistants but all the meetings were entirely fruitless. I asked why can t the city follow the Chennai model. Chennai, not so long ago was at the same place where Pune is, especially in relation to water. What happened next, in 2001 has been beautifully chronicled in Hindustan Times . What has not been shared in that story is that the idea was actually fielded by one of Chennai Mayor s assistants, an IAS Officer, I have forgotten her name, Thankfully, her advise/idea was taken to heart by the political establishment and they drove RWH. Saying why we can t do something similar in Pune, I heard all kinds of excuses. The worst and most used being Marathas can never unite which I think is pure bullshit. For people unfamiliar to the term, Marathas was a warrior clan in Shivaji s army. Shivaji, the king of Marathas were/are an expert tactician and master of guerilla warfare. It is due to the valor of Marathas, that we still have the Maratha Light Infantry a proud member of the Indian army. Why I said bullshit was the composition of people living in Maharashtra has changed over the decades. While at one time both the Brahmins and the Marathas had considerable political and population numbers, that has changed drastically. Maharashtra and more pointedly, Mumbai, Pune and Nagpur have become immigrant centres. Why just a decade back, Shiv Sena, an ultra right-wing political party used to play the Maratha card at each and every election and heckle people coming from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, this has been documented as the 2008 immigrants attacks and 9 years later we see Shiv Sena trying to field its candidates in Uttar Pradesh. So, obviously they cannot use the same tactics which they could at one point of time. One more reason I call it bullshit, is it s a very lame excuse. When the Prime Minister of the country calls for demonetization which affects 1.25 billion people, people die, people stand in queues and is largely peaceful, I do not see people resisting if they bring a good scheme. I almost forgot, as an added sweetener, the Chennai municipality said that if you do RWH and show photos and certificates of the job, you won t have to pay as much property tax as otherwise you would, that also boosted people s participation. And that is not the only solution, one more solution has been outlined in Aaj Bhi Khade hain talaab written by just-deceased Gandhian environmental activist Anupam Mishra. His Book can be downloaded for free at India Water Portal . Unfortunately, the said book doesn t have a good English translation till date. Interestingly, all of his content is licensed under public domain (CC-0) so people can continue to enjoy and learn from his life-work. Another lesson or understanding could be taken from Israel, the father of the modern micro-drip irrigation for crops. One of the things on my bucket lists is to visit Israel and if possible learn how they went from a water-deficient country to a water-surplus one. Which brings me to my second conundrum, most of the people believe that it s the Government s job to provide jobs to its people. India has been experiencing jobless growth for around a decade now, since the 2008 meltdown. While India was lucky to escape that, most of its trading partners weren t hence it slowed down International trade which slowed down creation of new enterprises etc. Laws such as the Bankruptcy law and the upcoming Goods and Services Tax . As everybody else, am a bit excited and a bit apprehensive about how the actual implementation will take place. Even International businesses has been found wanting. The latest example has been Uber and Ola. There have been protests against the two cab/taxi aggregators operating in India. For the millions of jobless students coming out of schools and Universities, there aren t simply enough jobs for them, nor are most (okay 50%) of them qualified for the jobs, these 50 percent are also untrainable, so what to do ? In reality, this is what keeps me awake at night. India is sitting on this ticking bomb-shell. It is really, a miracle that the youths have not rebelled yet. While all the conditions, proposals and counter-proposals have been shared before, I wanted/needed to highlight it. While the issue seems to be local, I would assert that they are all glocal in nature. The questions we are facing, I m sure both developing and to some extent even developed countries have probably been affected by it. I look forward to know what I can learn from them. Update 23/02/17 I had wanted to share about Debian s Voting system a bit, but that got derailed. Hence in order not to do, I ll just point towards 2015 platforms where 3 people vied for DPL post. I *think* I shared about DPL voting process earlier but if not, would do in detail in some future blog post.
Filed under: Miscellenous Tagged: #Anupam Mishra, #Bankruptcy law, #Chennai model, #clean air, #clean water, #elections, #GST, #immigrant, #immigrants, #Maratha, #Maratha Light Infantry, #migration, #national parties, #Political party manifesto, #regional parties, #ride-sharing, #water availability, Rain Water Harvesting

Here's what happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between Sunday February 12 and Saturday February 18 2017: Upcoming Events The Reproducible Build Zoo will be presented by Vagrant Cascadian at the Embedded Linux Conference in Portland, Oregon, February 22nd. Introduction to Reproducible Builds will be presented by Vagrant Cascadian at Scale15x in Pasadena, California, March 5th. Toolchain development and fixes Ximin Luo posted a preliminary spec for BUILD_PATH_PREFIX_MAP, bringing together work and research from previous weeks. Ximin refactored and consolidated much of our existing documentation on both SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH and BUILD_PATH_PREFIX_MAP into one unified page, Standard Environment Variables, with extended discussion on related solutions and how these all fit into people's ideas of what reproducible builds should look like in the long term. The specific pages for each variable still remain, at Timestamps Proposal and Build Path Proposal, only without content that was previously duplicated on both pages. Ximin filed #855282 against devscripts for debsign(1) to support buildinfo files, and wrote an initial series of patches for it with some further additions from Guillem Jover. Packages reviewed and fixed, and bugs filed Chris Lamb:

• #854999 filed against moin, and forwarded upstream.
• #855002 filed against samplv1, and forwarded upstream.
• #855426 filed against fritzing-parts.
• #855480 filed against examl.

Reviews of unreproducible packages 35 package reviews have been added, 1 have been updated and 17 have been removed in this week, adding to our knowledge about identified issues. 1 issue type has been added:

• nondeterminism_in_java_classes_generated_by_jxc

Weekly QA work During our reproducibility testing, the following FTBFS bugs have been detected and reported by:

• Chris Lamb (2)

diffoscope development diffoscope 77 was uploaded to unstable by Mattia Rizzolo. It included contributions from:

• Chris Lamb:
  • Some fixes to tests and testing config
  • Don't track archive directory locations, a better fix for CVE-2017-0359.
  • Add --exclude option. Closes: #854783
• Mattia Rizzolo:
  • Add my key to debian/upstream/signing-key.asc
  • Add CVE-2017-0359 to the changelog of v76
• Ximin Luo:
  • When extracting archives, try to keep directory sizes small

strip-nondeterminism development strip-nondeterminism 0.031-1 was uploaded to unstable by Chris Lamb. It included contributions from:

• Chris Lamb:
  • Make the tests less brittle, by not testing for stat(2) blksize and blocks. #854937

strip-nondeterminism 0.031-1~bpo8+1 was uploaded to jessie-backports by Mattia. tests.reproducible-builds.org

• Vagrant Cascadian and Holger Levsen set up two new armhf nodes, p64b and p64c running on pine64 boards with an arm64 kernel and armhf userland. This introduces kernel variations to armhf. New setup & maintenance jobs were set up too, plus 6 new builder jobs for armhf.

Misc. This week's edition was written by Ximin Luo & reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible Builds folks on IRC & the mailing lists.

I was wrong. After the other blog post About process limits, some people contacted me with additional data and information. I myself continued to investigate on the issue, so I have new facts. I read again the source code of the slapd daemon and the picture seems clearer now. A new message appeared in the log files: This message is clearly produced by the daemon itself, and searching for the string leads to this source code, in servers/slapd/daemon.c: In that same file, dtblsize is set to: If you keep pulling the string, the first two options use system limits to know the value, getrlimit(), and the last one uses a fixed value of 4096 (set at build time). It turns out that this routine slapd_daemon_init() is called once, at daemon startup (see main() function at servers/slapd/main.c). So the daemon is limiting itself to the limit imposed by the system at daemon startup time. That means that our previous limits settings at runtime was not being read by the slapd daemon. Let s back to the previous approach of establishing the process limits by setting them on the user. The common method is to call ulimit in the init.d script (or systemd service file). One of my concerns of this approach was that slapd runs as a different user, usually openldap. Again, reading the source code: So, the slapd daemon first reads the limits and then change user to openldap, (the slap_init_user() function). We can then asume that if we set the limits to the root user, calling ulimit in the init.d script, the slapd daemon will actually inherint them. This is what is originally suggested in debian bug #660917. Let s use this solution for now. Many thanks to John Hughes john@atlantech.com for the clarifications via email.

I just noticed the new Norwegian proposal for archiving rules in the goverment list ECMA-376 / ISO/IEC 29500 (aka OOXML) as valid formats to put in long term storage. Luckily such files will only be accepted based on pre-approval from the National Archive. Allowing OOXML files to be used for long term storage might seem like a good idea as long as we forget that there are plenty of ways for a "valid" OOXML document to have content with no defined interpretation in the standard, which lead to a question and an idea. Is there any tool to detect if a OOXML document depend on such undefined behaviour? It would be useful for the National Archive (and anyone else interested in verifying that a document is well defined) to have such tool available when considering to approve the use of OOXML. I'm aware of the officeotron OOXML validator, but do not know how complete it is nor if it will report use of undefined behaviour. Are there other similar tools available? Please send me an email if you know of any such tool.

Categories:

• Debian-Blog
• Computing
• Tools

Keywords:

• fitbit
• pip
• python
• linux containers
• systemd-nspawn

Like:

$ sudo apt install khal
 
Unpacking khal (0.8.4-3) ...
 
$ (echo 1;echo 0;echo y;echo 0; echo y; echo n; echo y; echo y)    khal configure
 
Do you want to write the config to /home/user/.config/khal/khal.conf? (Choosing  No  will abort) [y/N]: Successfully wrote configuration to /home/user/.config/khal/khal.conf
$ wget https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debconf-data/dc17.git/plain/misc/until-dc17.ics
 
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 6120 (6.0K) [text/plain]
Saving to:  until-dc17.ics 
 
$ khal import --batch -a private until-dc17.ics
$ khal agenda --days 14
Today:
16:30-17:30: DebConf Weekly Meeting  
27-02-2017
16:30-17:30: DebConf Weekly Meeting  

khal is available in stretch and newer and is probably best run from cron piping into '/usr/bin/mail' Thanks to Gunnar Wolf for figuring it all out.

Part three of a series. part 1, part 2. One morning last week I woke up to find the LED on my NAS a solid red. I've never been happier to have something fail. I'd set up my backup jobs to fire off a systemd unit on failure

OnFailure=status-email-user@%n.service

This is a generator-service, which is used to fire off an email to me when something goes wrong. I followed these instructions on the Arch wiki to set it up). Once I got the blinkstick, I added an additional command to that service to light up the LED:

ExecStart=-/usr/local/bin/blinkstick --index 1 --limit 50 --set-color red

The actual failure was a simple thing to fix. But I never did get the email. On further investigation, there are problems with using exim and systemd in Debian at the moment: it's possible for the exim4 daemon to exit and for systemd not to know that this is a failure, thus, the mail spool never gets processed. This should probably be fixed by the exim4 package providing a proper systemd service unit.

I've been tweaking my blog a little over the past few days, getting ready for a new release of the chronicle blog compiler (github). During the course of that I rewrote all the posts to have 100% lower-case file-paths. Redirection-pages have been auto-generated for each page which was previously mixed-case, but unfortunately that will have meant that the RSS feed updated unnecessarily:

• If it used to contain:
  • https://example.com/Some_Page.html
• It would have been updated to contain
  • https://example.com/some_page.html

That triggered a lot of spamming, as the URLs would have shown up as being new/unread/distinct.

I've gotten in the habit of going to the FSF's LibrePlanet conference in Boston. It's a very special conference, much wider ranging than a typical technology conference, solidly grounded in software freedom, and full of extraordinary people. (And the only conference I've ever taken my Mom to!) After attending for four years, I finally thought it was time to perhaps speak at it.

Four keynote speakers will anchor the event. Kade Crockford, director of the Technology for Liberty program of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, will kick things off on Saturday morning by sharing how technologists can enlist in the growing fight for civil liberties. On Saturday night, Free Software Foundation president Richard Stallman will present the Free Software Awards and discuss pressing threats and important opportunities for software freedom. Day two will begin with Cory Doctorow, science fiction author and special consultant to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, revealing how to eradicate all Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) in a decade. The conference will draw to a close with Sumana Harihareswara, leader, speaker, and advocate for free software and communities, giving a talk entitled "Lessons, Myths, and Lenses: What I Wish I'd Known in 1998." That's not all. We'll hear about the GNU philosophy from Marianne Corvellec of the French free software organization April, Joey Hess will touch on encryption with a talk about backing up your GPG keys, and Denver Gingerich will update us on a crucial free software need: the mobile phone. Others will look at ways to grow the free software movement: through cross-pollination with other activist movements, removal of barriers to free software use and contribution, and new ideas for free software as paid work.

-- Here's a sneak peek at LibrePlanet 2017: Register today! I'll be giving some varient of the keysafe talk from Linux.Conf.Au. By the way, videos of my keysafe and propellor talks at Linux.Conf.Au are now available, see the talks page.

As we noted in an earlier article, passwords are a liability and we'd prefer to get rid of them, but the current reality is that we do use a plethora of passwords in our daily lives. This problem is especially acute for technology professionals, particularly system administrators, who have to manage a lot of different machines. But it also affects regular users who still use a large number of passwords, from their online bank to their favorite social-networking site. Despite the remarkable memory capacity of the human brain, humans are actually terrible at recalling even short sets of arbitrary characters with the precision needed for passwords. Therefore humans reuse passwords, make them trivial or guessable, write them down on little paper notes and stick them on their screens, or just reset them by email every time. Our memory is undeniably failing us and we need help, which is where password managers come in. Password managers allow users to store an arbitrary number of passwords and just remember a single password to unlock them all. But there is a large variety of password managers out there, so which one should we be using? At my previous job, an inventory was done of about 40 different free-software password managers in different stages of development and of varying quality. So, obviously, this article will not be exhaustive, but instead focus on a smaller set of some well-known options that may be interesting to readers.

KeePass: the popular alternative The most commonly used password-manager design pattern is to store passwords in a file that is encrypted and password-protected. The most popular free-software password manager of this kind is probably KeePass. An important feature of KeePass is the ability to auto-type passwords in forms, most notably in web browsers. This feature makes KeePass really easy to use, especially considering it also supports global key bindings to access passwords. KeePass databases are designed for simultaneous access by multiple users, for example, using a shared network drive. KeePass has a graphical interface written in C#, so it uses the Mono framework on Linux. A separate project, called KeePassX is a clean-room implementation written in C++ using the Qt framework. Both support the AES and Twofish encryption algorithms, although KeePass recently added support for the ChaCha20 cipher. AES key derivation is used to generate the actual encryption key for the database, but the latest release of KeePass also added using Argon2, which was the winner of the July 2015 password-hashing competition. Both programs are more or less equivalent, although the original KeePass seem to have more features in general. The KeePassX project has recently been forked into another project now called KeePassXC that implements a set of new features that are present in KeePass but missing from KeePassX like:

• auto-type on Linux, Mac OS, and Windows
• database merging which allows multi-user support
• using the web site's favicon in the interface

So far, the maintainers of KeePassXC seem to be open to re-merging the project "if the original maintainer of KeePassX in the future will be more active and will accept our merge and changes". I can confirm that, at the time of writing, the original KeePassX project now has 79 pending pull requests and only one pull request was merged since the last release, which was 2.0.3 in September 2016. While KeePass and derivatives allow multiple users to access the same database through the merging process, they do not support multi-party access to a single database. This may be a limiting factor for larger organizations, where you may need, for example, a different password set for different technical support team levels. The solution in this case is to use separate databases for each team, with each team using a different shared secret.

Pass: the standard password manager? I am currently using password-store, or pass, as a password manager. It aims to be "the standard Unix password manager". Pass is a GnuPG-based password manager that features a surprising number of features given its small size:

• copy-paste support
• Git integration
• multi-user/group support
• pluggable extensions (in the upcoming 1.7 release)

The command-line interface is simple to use and intuitive. The following, will, for example, create a pass repository, a 20 character password for your LWN account and copy it to the clipboard:

    $ pass init
    $ pass generate -c lwn 20

The main issue with pass is that it doesn't encrypt the name of those entries: if someone were to compromise my machine, they could easily see which sites I have access to simply by listing the passwords stored in ~/.password-store. This is a deliberate design decision by the upstream project, as stated by a mailing list participant, Allan Odgaard:

Using a single file per item has the advantage of shell completion, using version control, browse, move and rename the items in a file browser, edit them in a regular editor (that does GPG, or manually run GPG first), etc.

Odgaard goes on to point out that there are alternatives that do encrypt the entire database (including the site names) if users really need that feature. Furthermore, there is a tomb plugin for pass that encrypts the password store in a LUKS container (called a "tomb"), although it requires explicitly opening and closing the container, which makes it only marginally better than using full disk encryption system-wide. One could also argue that password file names do not hold secret information, only the site name and username, perhaps, and that doesn't require secrecy. I do believe those should be kept secret, however, as they could be used to discover (or prove) which sites you have access to and then used to perform other attacks. One could draw a parallel with the SSH known_hosts file, which used to be plain text but is now hashed so that hosts are more difficult to discover. Also, sharing a database for multi-user support will require some sort of file-sharing mechanism. Given the integrated Git support, this will likely involve setting up a private Git repository for your team, something which may not be accessible to the average Linux user. Nothing keeps you, however, from sharing the ~/.password-store directory through another file sharing mechanism like (say) Syncthing or Dropbox. You can use multiple distinct databases easily using the PASSWORD_STORE_DIR environment variable. For example, you could have a shell alias to use a different repository for your work passwords with:

    alias work-pass="PASSWORD_STORE_DIR=~/work-passwords pass"

Group support comes from a clever use of the GnuPG multiple-recipient encryption support. You simply have to specify multiple OpenPGP identities when initializing the repository, which also works in subdirectories:

    $ pass init -p Ateam me@example.com joelle@example.com
    mkdir: created directory '/home/me/.password-store/Ateam'
    Password store initialized for me@example.com, joelle@example.com
    [master 0e3dbe7] Set GPG id to me@example.com, joelle@example.com.
     1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
     create mode 100644 Ateam/.gpg-id

The above will configure pass to encrypt the passwords in the Ateam directory for me@example.com and joelle@example.com. Pass depends on GnuPG to do the right thing when encrypting files and how those identities are treated is entirely delegated to GnuPG's default configuration. This could lead to problems if arbitrary keys can be injected into your key ring, which could confuse GnuPG. I would therefore recommend using full key fingerprints instead of user identifiers. Regarding the actual encryption algorithms used, in my tests, GnuPG 1.4.18 and 2.1.18 seemed to default to 256-bit AES for encryption, but that has not always been the case. The chosen encryption algorithm actually depends on the recipient's key preferences, which may vary wildly: older keys and versions may use anything from 128-bit AES to CAST5 or Triple DES. To figure out which algorithm GnuPG chose, you may want to try this pipeline:

    $ echo test   gpg -e -r you@example.com   gpg -d -v
    [...]
    gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID XXXXXXX, created XXXXX
      "You Person You <you@example.com>"
    gpg: AES256 encrypted data
    gpg: original file name=''
    test

As you can see, pass is primarily a command-line application, which may make it less accessible to regular users. The community has produced different graphical interfaces that are either using pass directly or operate on the storage with their own GnuPG integration. I personally use pass in combination with Rofi to get quick access to my passwords, but less savvy users may want to try the QtPass interface, which should be more user-friendly. QtPass doesn't actually depend on pass and can use GnuPG directly to interact with the pass database; it is available for Linux, BSD, OS X, and Windows.

Browser password managers Most users are probably already using a password manager through their web browser's "remember password" functionality. For example, Chromium will ask if you want it to remember passwords and encrypt them with your operating system's facilities. For Windows, this encrypts the passwords with your login password and, for GNOME, it will store the passwords in the gnome-keyring storage. If you synchronize your Chromium settings with your Google account, Chromium will store those passwords on Google's servers, encrypted with a key that is stored in the Google Account itself. So your passwords are then only as safe as your Google account. Note that this was covered here in 2010, although back then Chromium didn't synchronize with the Google cloud or encrypt with the system-level key rings. That facility was only added in 2013. In Firefox, there's an optional, profile-specific master password that unlocks all passwords. In this case, the issue is that browsers are generally always open, so the vault is always unlocked. And this is for users that actually do pick a master password; users are often completely unaware that they should set one. The unlocking mechanism is a typical convenience-security trade-off: either users need to constantly input their master passwords to login or they don't, and the passwords are available in the clear. In this case, Chromium's approach of actually asking users to unlock their vault seems preferable, even though the developers actually refused to implement the feature for years. Overall, I would recommend against using a browser-based password manager. Even if it is not used for critical sites, you will end up with hundreds of such passwords that are vulnerable while the browser is running (in the case of Firefox) or at the whim of Google (in the case of Chromium). Furthermore, the "auto-fill" feature that is often coupled with browser-based password managers is often vulnerable to serious attacks, which is mentioned below. Finally, because browser-based managers generally lack a proper password generator, users may fail to use properly generated passwords, so they can then be easily broken. A password generator has been requested for Firefox, according to this feature request opened in 2007, and there is a password generator in Chrome, but it is disabled by default and hidden in the mysterious chrome://flags URL.

Other notable password managers Another alternative password manager, briefly mentioned in the previous article, is the minimalistic Assword password manager that, despite its questionable name, is also interesting. Its main advantage over pass is that it uses a single encrypted JSON file for storage, and therefore doesn't leak the name of the entries by default. In addition to copy/paste, Assword also supports automatically entering passphrases in fields using the xdo library. Like pass, it uses GnuPG to encrypt passphrases. According to Assword maintainer Daniel Kahn Gillmor in email, the main issue with Assword is "interaction between generated passwords and insane password policies". He gave the example of the Time-Warner Cable registration form that requires, among other things, "letters and numbers, between 8 and 16 characters and not repeat the same characters 3 times in a row". Another well-known password manager is the commercial LastPass service which released a free-software command-line client called lastpass-cli about three years ago. Unfortunately, the server software of the lastpass.com service is still proprietary. And given that LastPass has had at least two serious security breaches since that release, one could legitimately question whether this is a viable solution for storing important secrets. In general, web-based password managers expose a whole new attack surface that is not present in regular password managers. A 2014 study by University of California researchers showed that, out of five password managers studied, every one of them was vulnerable to at least one of the vulnerabilities studied. LastPass was, in particular, vulnerable to a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attack that allowed an attacker to bypass account authentication and access the encrypted database.

Problems with password managers When you share a password database within a team, how do you remove access to a member of the team? While you can, for example, re-encrypt a pass database with new keys (thereby removing or adding certain accesses) or change the password on a KeePass database, a hostile party could have made a backup of the database before the revocation. Indeed, in the case of pass, older entries are still in the Git history. So access revocation is a problematic issue found with all shared password managers, as it may actually mean going through every password and changing them online. This fundamental problem with shared secrets can be better addressed with a tool like Vault or SFLvault. Those tools aim to provide teams with easy ways to store dynamic tokens like API keys or service passwords and share them not only with other humans, but also make them accessible to machines. The general idea of those projects is to store secrets in a central server and send them directly to relevant services without human intervention. This way, passwords are not actually shared anymore, which is similar in spirit to the approach taken by centralized authentication systems like Kerberos. If you are looking at password management for teams, those projects may be worth a look. Furthermore, some password managers that support auto-typing were found to be vulnerable to HTML injection attacks: if some third-party ad or content is able to successfully hijack the parent DOM content, it masquerades as a form that could fool auto-typing software as demonstrated by this paper that was submitted at USENIX 2014. Fortunately, KeePass was not vulnerable according to the security researchers, but LastPass was, again, vulnerable.

Future of password managers? All of the solutions discussed here assume you have a trusted computer you regularly have access to, which is a usage pattern that seems to be disappearing with a majority of the population. You could consider your phone to be that trusted device, yet a phone can be lost or stolen more easily than a traditional workstation or even a laptop. And while KeePass has Android and iOS ports, those do not resolve the question of how to share the password storage among those devices or how to back them up. Password managers are fundamentally file-based, and the "file" concept seems to be quickly disappearing, faster than we technologists sometimes like to admit. Looking at some relatives' use of computers, I notice it is less about "files" than images, videos, recipes, and various abstract objects that are stored in the "cloud". They do not use local storage so much anymore. In that environment, password managers lose their primary advantage, which is a local, somewhat offline file storage that is not directly accessible to attackers. Therefore certain password managers are specifically designed for the cloud, like LastPass or web browser profile synchronization features, without necessarily addressing the inherent issues with cloud storage and opening up huge privacy and security issues that we absolutely need to address. This is where the "password hasher" design comes in. Also known as "stateless" or "deterministic" password managers, password hashers are emerging as a convenient solution that could possibly replace traditional password managers as users switch from generic computing platforms to cloud-based infrastructure. We will cover password hashers and the major security challenges they pose in a future article.

Note: this article first appeared in the Linux Weekly News.

As we noted in an earlier article, passwords are a liability and we'd prefer to get rid of them, but the current reality is that we do use a plethora of passwords in our daily lives. This problem is especially acute for technology professionals, particularly system administrators, who have to manage a lot of different machines. But it also affects regular users who still use a large number of passwords, from their online bank to their favorite social-networking site. Despite the remarkable memory capacity of the human brain, humans are actually terrible at recalling even short sets of arbitrary characters with the precision needed for passwords. Therefore humans reuse passwords, make them trivial or guessable, write them down on little paper notes and stick them on their screens, or just reset them by email every time. Our memory is undeniably failing us and we need help, which is where password managers come in. Password managers allow users to store an arbitrary number of passwords and just remember a single password to unlock them all. But there is a large variety of password managers out there, so which one should we be using? At my previous job, an inventory was done of about 40 different free-software password managers in different stages of development and of varying quality. So, obviously, this article will not be exhaustive, but instead focus on a smaller set of some well-known options that may be interesting to readers.

KeePass: the popular alternative The most commonly used password-manager design pattern is to store passwords in a file that is encrypted and password-protected. The most popular free-software password manager of this kind is probably KeePass. An important feature of KeePass is the ability to auto-type passwords in forms, most notably in web browsers. This feature makes KeePass really easy to use, especially considering it also supports global key bindings to access passwords. KeePass databases are designed for simultaneous access by multiple users, for example, using a shared network drive. KeePass has a graphical interface written in C#, so it uses the Mono framework on Linux. A separate project, called KeePassX is a clean-room implementation written in C++ using the Qt framework. Both support the AES and Twofish encryption algorithms, although KeePass recently added support for the ChaCha20 cipher. AES key derivation is used to generate the actual encryption key for the database, but the latest release of KeePass also added using Argon2, which was the winner of the July 2015 password-hashing competition. Both programs are more or less equivalent, although the original KeePass seem to have more features in general. The KeePassX project has recently been forked into another project now called KeePassXC that implements a set of new features that are present in KeePass but missing from KeePassX like:

• auto-type on Linux, Mac OS, and Windows
• database merging which allows multi-user support
• using the web site's favicon in the interface

So far, the maintainers of KeePassXC seem to be open to re-merging the project "if the original maintainer of KeePassX in the future will be more active and will accept our merge and changes". I can confirm that, at the time of writing, the original KeePassX project now has 79 pending pull requests and only one pull request was merged since the last release, which was 2.0.3 in September 2016. While KeePass and derivatives allow multiple users to access the same database through the merging process, they do not support multi-party access to a single database. This may be a limiting factor for larger organizations, where you may need, for example, a different password set for different technical support team levels. The solution in this case is to use separate databases for each team, with each team using a different shared secret.

Pass: the standard password manager? I am currently using password-store, or pass, as a password manager. It aims to be "the standard Unix password manager". Pass is a GnuPG-based password manager that features a surprising number of features given its small size:

• copy-paste support
• Git integration
• multi-user/group support
• pluggable extensions (in the upcoming 1.7 release)

The command-line interface is simple to use and intuitive. The following, will, for example, create a pass repository, a 20 character password for your LWN account and copy it to the clipboard:

    $ pass init
    $ pass generate -c lwn 20

The main issue with pass is that it doesn't encrypt the name of those entries: if someone were to compromise my machine, they could easily see which sites I have access to simply by listing the passwords stored in ~/.password-store. This is a deliberate design decision by the upstream project, as stated by a mailing list participant, Allan Odgaard:

Using a single file per item has the advantage of shell completion, using version control, browse, move and rename the items in a file browser, edit them in a regular editor (that does GPG, or manually run GPG first), etc.

Odgaard goes on to point out that there are alternatives that do encrypt the entire database (including the site names) if users really need that feature. Furthermore, there is a tomb plugin for pass that encrypts the password store in a LUKS container (called a "tomb"), although it requires explicitly opening and closing the container, which makes it only marginally better than using full disk encryption system-wide. One could also argue that password file names do not hold secret information, only the site name and username, perhaps, and that doesn't require secrecy. I do believe those should be kept secret, however, as they could be used to discover (or prove) which sites you have access to and then used to perform other attacks. One could draw a parallel with the SSH known_hosts file, which used to be plain text but is now hashed so that hosts are more difficult to discover. Also, sharing a database for multi-user support will require some sort of file-sharing mechanism. Given the integrated Git support, this will likely involve setting up a private Git repository for your team, something which may not be accessible to the average Linux user. Nothing keeps you, however, from sharing the ~/.password-store directory through another file sharing mechanism like (say) Syncthing or Dropbox). You can use multiple distinct databases easily using the PASSWORD_STORE_DIR environment variable. For example, you could have a shell alias to use a different repository for your work passwords with:

    alias work-pass="PASSWORD_STORE_DIR=~/work-passwords pass"

Group support comes from a clever use of the GnuPG multiple-recipient encryption support. You simply have to specify multiple OpenPGP identities when initializing the repository, which also works in subdirectories:

    $ pass init -p Ateam me@example.com joelle@example.com
    mkdir: created directory '/home/me/.password-store/Ateam'
    Password store initialized for me@example.com, joelle@example.com
    [master 0e3dbe7] Set GPG id to me@example.com, joelle@example.com.
     1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
     create mode 100644 Ateam/.gpg-id

The above will configure pass to encrypt the passwords in the Ateam directory for me@example.com and joelle@example.com. Pass depends on GnuPG to do the right thing when encrypting files and how those identities are treated is entirely delegated to GnuPG's default configuration. This could lead to problems if arbitrary keys can be injected into your key ring, which could confuse GnuPG. I would therefore recommend using full key fingerprints instead of user identifiers. Regarding the actual encryption algorithms used, in my tests, GnuPG 1.4.18 and 2.1.18 seemed to default to 256-bit AES for encryption, but that has not always been the case. The chosen encryption algorithm actually depends on the recipient's key preferences, which may vary wildly: older keys and versions may use anything from 128-bit AES to CAST5 or Triple DES. To figure out which algorithm GnuPG chose, you may want to try this pipeline:

    $ echo test   gpg -e -r you@example.com   gpg -d -v
    [...]
    gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID XXXXXXX, created XXXXX
      "You Person You <you@example.com>"
    gpg: AES256 encrypted data
    gpg: original file name=''
    test

As you can see, pass is primarily a command-line application, which may make it less accessible to regular users. The community has produced different graphical interfaces that are either using pass directly or operate on the storage with their own GnuPG integration. I personally use pass in combination with Rofi to get quick access to my passwords, but less savvy users may want to try the QtPass interface, which should be more user-friendly. QtPass doesn't actually depend on pass and can use GnuPG directly to interact with the pass database; it is available for Linux, BSD, OS X, and Windows.

Browser password managers Most users are probably already using a password manager through their web browser's "remember password" functionality. For example, Chromium will ask if you want it to remember passwords and encrypt them with your operating system's facilities. For Windows, this encrypts the passwords with your login password and, for GNOME, it will store the passwords in the gnome-keyring storage. If you synchronize your Chromium settings with your Google account, Chromium will store those passwords on Google's servers, encrypted with a key that is stored in the Google Account itself. So your passwords are then only as safe as your Google account. Note that this was covered here in 2010, although back then Chromium didn't synchronize with the Google cloud or encrypt with the system-level key rings. That facility was only added in 2013. In Firefox, there's an optional, profile-specific master password that unlocks all passwords. In this case, the issue is that browsers are generally always open, so the vault is always unlocked. And this is for users that actually do pick a master password; users are often completely unaware that they should set one. The unlocking mechanism is a typical convenience-security trade-off: either users need to constantly input their master passwords to login or they don't, and the passwords are available in the clear. In this case, Chromium's approach of actually asking users to unlock their vault seems preferable, even though the developers actually refused to implement the feature for years. Overall, I would recommend against using a browser-based password manager. Even if it is not used for critical sites, you will end up with hundreds of such passwords that are vulnerable while the browser is running (in the case of Firefox) or at the whim of Google (in the case of Chromium). Furthermore, the "auto-fill" feature that is often coupled with browser-based password managers is often vulnerable to serious attacks, which is mentioned below. Finally, because browser-based managers generally lack a proper password generator, users may fail to use properly generated passwords, so they can then be easily broken. A password generator has been requested for Firefox, according to this feature request opened in 2007, and there is a password generator in Chrome, but it is disabled by default and hidden in the mysterious chrome://flags URL.

Other notable password managers Another alternative password manager, briefly mentioned in the previous article, is the minimalistic Assword password manager that, despite its questionable name, is also interesting. Its main advantage over pass is that it uses a single encrypted JSON file for storage, and therefore doesn't leak the name of the entries by default. In addition to copy/paste, Assword also supports automatically entering passphrases in fields using the xdo library. Like pass, it uses GnuPG to encrypt passphrases. According to Assword maintainer Daniel Kahn Gillmor in email, the main issue with Assword is "interaction between generated passwords and insane password policies". He gave the example of the Time-Warner Cable registration form that requires, among other things, "letters and numbers, between 8 and 16 characters and not repeat the same characters 3 times in a row". Another well-known password manager is the commercial LastPass service which released a free-software command-line client called lastpass-cli about three years ago. Unfortunately, the server software of the lastpass.com service is still proprietary. And given that LastPass has had at least two serious security breaches since that release, one could legitimately question whether this is a viable solution for storing important secrets. In general, web-based password managers expose a whole new attack surface that is not present in regular password managers. A 2014 study by University of California researchers showed that, out of five password managers studied, every one of them was vulnerable to at least one of the vulnerabilities studied. LastPass was, in particular, vulnerable to a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attack that allowed an attacker to bypass account authentication and access the encrypted database.

Problems with password managers When you share a password database within a team, how do you remove access to a member of the team? While you can, for example, re-encrypt a pass database with new keys (thereby removing or adding certain accesses) or change the password on a KeePass database, a hostile party could have made a backup of the database before the revocation. Indeed, in the case of pass, older entries are still in the Git history. So access revocation is a problematic issue found with all shared password managers, as it may actually mean going through every password and changing them online. This fundamental problem with shared secrets can be better addressed with a tool like Vault or SFLvault. Those tools aim to provide teams with easy ways to store dynamic tokens like API keys or service passwords and share them not only with other humans, but also make them accessible to machines. The general idea of those projects is to store secrets in a central server and send them directly to relevant services without human intervention. This way, passwords are not actually shared anymore, which is similar in spirit to the approach taken by centralized authentication systems like Kerberos). If you are looking at password management for teams, those projects may be worth a look. Furthermore, some password managers that support auto-typing were found to be vulnerable to HTML injection attacks: if some third-party ad or content is able to successfully hijack the parent DOM content, it masquerades as a form that could fool auto-typing software as demonstrated by this paper that was submitted at USENIX 2014. Fortunately, KeePass was not vulnerable according to the security researchers, but LastPass was, again, vulnerable.

Future of password managers? All of the solutions discussed here assume you have a trusted computer you regularly have access to, which is a usage pattern that seems to be disappearing with a majority of the population. You could consider your phone to be that trusted device, yet a phone can be lost or stolen more easily than a traditional workstation or even a laptop. And while KeePass has Android and iOS ports, those do not resolve the question of how to share the password storage among those devices or how to back them up. Password managers are fundamentally file-based, and the "file" concept seems to be quickly disappearing, faster than we technologists sometimes like to admit. Looking at some relatives' use of computers, I notice it is less about "files" than images, videos, recipes, and various abstract objects that are stored in the "cloud". They do not use local storage so much anymore. In that environment, password managers lose their primary advantage, which is a local, somewhat offline file storage that is not directly accessible to attackers. Therefore certain password managers are specifically designed for the cloud, like LastPass or web browser profile synchronization features, without necessarily addressing the inherent issues with cloud storage and opening up huge privacy and security issues that we absolutely need to address. This is where the "password hasher" design comes in. Also known as "stateless" or "deterministic" password managers, password hashers are emerging as a convenient solution that could possibly replace traditional password managers as users switch from generic computing platforms to cloud-based infrastructure. We will cover password hashers and the major security challenges they pose in a future article.

Note: this article first appeared in the Linux Weekly News.

An organizer friend interested in activating a rapid response network to counter Trump-era ICE raids on immigrants asked me about any existing simple and easy tools that could send out emergency SMS/text message alerts. I thought about it and ended up writing my first pouchdb web application to accomplish the task. For the curious, you can see it in action and browse the source code. To use it to send SMS, you have to register for a Twilio account - you can get a free account that has very restricted SMS sending capability or pay for full functionality. The project is unlike anything I have done before. I chose pouchdb because it stores all of your contacts in your browser not on a server somewhere in the so-called cloud. (You can also choose to sync to a server, a feature I have not yet implemented.) The implications of storing your data locally are quite profound. Classic Web App Let's first consider the more common web application: You visit a web site (the same web site that your colleagues visit, or in the case of a massive application like gmail.com, the same web site that everyone in the world visits). Then, you login with your own unique username and password, which grants you access to the portion the database that you are suppose to have access to. For most use-cases, this model is fairly ideal:

• If you have a technically competent host, your data is backed up regularly and the database is available nearly 100% of the time
• If you have a politically trust-worthy host, your host will notify you and put up a fight before turning any of your data over to a government agent
• If you drop your phone in the toilet you can always login from another computer to access your data
• If you save your password in your browser and your laptop is stolen, you can always change your password to prevent the thief from accessing your data
• You can easily share your data with others by creating new usernames and passwords

However, there are some downsides:

• If your host is not technically competent or polically trust-worthy, you could lose all of your data to a hard drive crash or subpoena
• Even if your host is competent, all of your data is one previously undiscovered vulnerability away from being hacked
• Even if your host is politically trust-worthy, you cannot always stop a subpoena, particularly given the legal escalations of tools like national security letters

pouchdb no sync Assuming you are accessing your database on a device with an encrypted disk and you manage your own backups, pouchdb without synchoronizing provides the most privacy and autonomy. You have complete control of your data and you are not dependent on any server operator. However, the trade-offs are harsh:

• Availability: if you lose your device, you would need to restore from backup - which is much more difficult than simply logging in from another device
• Collaboration: you simply can't share this data with anyone else

It seems this model is fairly useless except in very tight corner cases. pouchdb that synchronizes to a server With this model, you avoid the trade-offs of the no sync model (hooray!). However, you also lose all of the privacy benefits, and it's even worse: your data can be compromised either via a server breach or via a compromise of any of the devices you are using. If any of these devices lack encrypted disks, then it's borderline reckless. On the other hand, you gain a huge benefit in terms of reliability. If the server goes down, loses your data, fails to backup or is taken offline by a legal order, you can still function perfectly well and can optionally choose to sync to a different host. Conclusions Ultimately, we need to better evaluate the trade-offs between privacy and availability for each given use of a database and try to make the best decision. And... keep working on new models. For example, it seems an ideal middle ground would be to sync in a peer-to-peer fashion with our colleagues (see PeerPouch) or sync to a server under your control in your office.

The Python API for the Debian package manager APT is useful for writing practical system maintenance scripts, which are going beyond shell scripting capabilities. There are Python2 and Python3 libraries for that available as packages, as well as a documentation in the package python-apt-doc. If that s also installed, the documentation then could be found in /usr/share/doc/python-apt-doc/html/index.html, and there are also a couple of example scripts shipped into /usr/share/doc/python-apt-doc/examples. The libraries mainly consists of Python bindings for the libapt-inst and libapt-pkg C++ core libraries of the APT package manager, which makes it processing very fast. Debugging symbols are also available as packages (python ,3 -apt-dbg). The module apt_inst provides features like reading from binary packages, while apt_pkg resembles the functions of the package manager. There is also the apt abstraction layer which provides more convenient access to the library, like apt.cache.Cache() could be used to behave like apt-get:

from apt.cache import Cache
mycache = Cache()
mycache.update()                   # apt-get update
mycache.open()                     # re-open
mycache.upgrade(dist_upgrade=True) # apt-get dist-upgrade
mycache.commit()                   # apply

boil out selections As widely known, there is a feature of dpkg which helps to move a package inventory from one installation to another by just using a text file with a list of installed packages. A selections list containing all installed package could be easily generated with $ dpkg --get-selections > selections.txt. The resulting file then looks something similar like this:

$ cat selections.txt
0ad                                 install
0ad-data                            install
0ad-data-common                     install
a2ps                                install
abi-compliance-checker              install
abi-dumper                          install
abigail-tools                       install
accountsservice                     install
acl                                 install
acpi                                install

The counterpart for this operation (--set-selections) could be used to reinstall (add) the complete package inventory on another installation resp. computer (that needs superuser rights), like that s explained in the manpage dpkg(1). No problem so far. The problem is, if that list contains a package which couldn t be found in any of the package inventories which are set up in /etc/apt/sources.list(.d/) on the target system, dpkg stops the whole process:

# dpkg --set-selections < selections.txt
dpkg: warning: package not in database at line 524: google-chrome-beta
dpkg: warning: found unknown packages; this might mean the available database
is outdated, and needs to be updated through a frontend method

Thus, manually downloaded and installed wild packages from unofficial package sources are problematic for this approach, because the package installer simply doesn t know where to get them. Luckily, dpkg puts out the relevant package names, but instead of having them removed manually with an editor this little Python script for python3-apt automatically deletes any of these packages from a selections file:

#!/usr/bin/env python3
import sys
import apt_pkg
apt_pkg.init()
cache = apt_pkg.Cache()
infile = open(sys.argv[1])
outfile_name = sys.argv[1] + '.boiled'
outfile = open(outfile_name, "w")
for line in infile:
    package = line.split()[0]
    if package in cache:
        outfile.write(line)
infile.close()
outfile.close()
sys.exit(0)

The script takes one argument which is the name of the selections file which has been generated by dpkg. The low level module apt_pkg first has to been initialized with apt_pkg.init(). Then apt_pkg.Cache() can be used to instantiate a cache object (here: cache). That object is iterable, thus it s easy to not perform something if a package from that list couldn t be found in the database, like not copying the corresponding line into the outfile (.boiled), while the others are copied. The result then looks something like this:

$ diff selections.txt selections.txt.boiled 
3780d3779
< python-timemachine   install
4438d4436
< wlan-supercracker    install

That script might be useful also for moving from one distribution resp. derivative to another (like from Ubuntu to Debian). For productive use, open() should be of course secured against FileNotFound and IOError-s to prevent program crashs on such events.

purge rc-s Like also widely known, deinstalled packages leave stuff like configuration files, maintainer scripts and logs on the computer, to save that if the package gets reinstalled at some point in the future. That happens if dpkg has been used with -r/--remove instead of -P/--purge, which also removes these files which are left otherwise. These packages are then marked as rc in the package archive, like:

$ dpkg -l   grep ^rc
rc  firebird2.5-common          2.5.6.27020.ds4-3   amd64   common files for firebird 2.5 servers and clients
rc  firebird2.5-server-common   2.5.6.27020.ds4-3   amd64   common files for firebird 2.5 servers
rc  firebird3.0-common          3.0.1.32609.ds4-8   all     common files for firebird 3.0 server, client and utilities
rc  imagemagick-common          8:6.9.6.2+dfsg-2    all     image manipulation programs -- infrastructure dummy package

It could be purged over them afterwards to completely remove them from the system. There are several shell coding snippets to be found on the net for completing this job automatically, like this one here:

dpkg -l   grep "^rc"   sed  e "s/^rc //"  e "s/ .*$//"   \
xargs dpkg  purge

The first thing which is needed to handle this by a Python script is the information that in apt_pkg, the package state rc per default is represented by the code 5:

>>> testpackage = cache['firebird2.5-common']
>>> testpackage.current_state
5

For changing things in the database apt_pkg.DepCache() could be docked onto an cache object to manipulate the installation state of a package within, like marking it to be removed resp. purged:

>>> mydepcache = apt_pkg.DepCache(mycache)
>>> mydepcache.mark_delete(testpackage, True) # True = purge
>>> mydepcache.marked_delete(testpackage)
True

That s basically all which is needed for an old package purging maintenance script in Python 3, another iterator as package filter and there you go:

#!/usr/bin/env python3
import sys
import apt_pkg
from apt.progress.text import AcquireProgress
from apt.progress.base import InstallProgress
acquire = AcquireProgress()
install = InstallProgress()
apt_pkg.init()
cache = apt_pkg.Cache()
depcache = apt_pkg.DepCache(cache)
for paket in cache.packages:
    if paket.current_state == 5:
        depcache.mark_delete(paket, True)
depcache.commit(acquire, install)

The method DepCache.commit() applies the changes to the package archive at the end, and it needs apt_progress to perform. Of course this script needs superuser rights to run. It then returns something like this:

$ sudo ./rc-purge 
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Fetched 0 B in 0s (0 B/s)
custom fork found
got pid: 17984
got pid: 0
got fd: 4
(Reading database ... 701434 files and directories currently installed.)
Purging configuration files for libmimic0:amd64 (1.0.4-2.3) ...
Purging configuration files for libadns1 (1.5.0~rc1-1) ...
Purging configuration files for libreoffice-sdbc-firebird (1:5.2.2~rc2-2) ...
Purging configuration files for vlc-nox (2.2.4-7) ...
Purging configuration files for librlog5v5 (1.4-4) ...
Purging configuration files for firebird3.0-common (3.0.1.32609.ds4-8) ...
Purging configuration files for imagemagick-common (8:6.9.6.2+dfsg-2) ...
Purging configuration files for firebird2.5-server-common (2.5.6.27020.ds4-3)

It s not yet production ready (like there s an infinite loop if dpkg returns error code 1 like from can t remove non empty folder ). But generally, ATTENTION: be very careful with typos and other mistakes if you want to use that code snippet, a false script performing changes on the package database might destroy the integrity of your system, and you don t want that to happen.

detect wild packages Like said above, installed Debian packages might be called wild if they have been downloaded from somewhere on the net and installed manually, like that is done from time to time on many systems. If you want to remove that whole class of packages again for any reason, the question would be how to detect them. A characteristic element is that there is no source connected to such a package, and that could be detected by Python scripting using again the bindings for the APT libraries. The package object doesn t have an associated method to query its source, because the origin is always connected to a specific package version, like some specific version might have come from security updates for example. The current version of a package can be queried with DepCache.get_candidate_ver() which returns a complex apt_pkg.Version object:

>>> import apt_pkg
>>> apt_pkg.init()
>>> mycache = apt_pkg.Cache()
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
>>> mydepcache = apt_pkg.DepCache(mycache)
>>> testpackage = mydepcache.get_candidate_ver(mycache['nano'])
>>> testpackage
<apt_pkg.Version object: Pkg:'nano' Ver:'2.7.4-1' Section:'editors'  Arch:'amd64' Size:484790 ISize:2092032 Hash:33578 ID:31706 Priority:2>

For version objects there is the method file_list available, which returns a list containing PackageFile() objects:

>>> testpackage.file_list
[(<apt_pkg.PackageFile object: filename:'/var/lib/apt/lists/httpredir.debian.org_debian_dists_testing_main_binary-amd64_Packages'  a=testing,c=main,v=,o=Debian,l=Debian arch='amd64' site='httpredir.debian.org' IndexType='Debian Package Index' Size=38943764 ID:0>, 669901L)]

These file objects contain the index files which are associated with a specific package source (a downloaded package index), which could be read out easily (using a for-loop because there could be multiple file objects):

>>> for files in testpackage.file_list:
...     print(files[0].filename)
/var/lib/apt/lists/httpredir.debian.org_debian_dists_testing_main_binary-amd64_Packages

That explains itself: the nano binary package on this amd64 computer comes from httpredir.debian.org/debian testing main. If a package is wild that means it was installed manually, so there is no associated index file to be found, but only /var/lib/dpkg/status (libcudnn5 is not in the official package archives but distributed by Nvidia as a .deb package):

>>> testpackage2 = mydepcache.get_candidate_ver(mycache['libcudnn5'])
>>> for files in testpackage2.file_list:
...     print(files[0].filename)
/var/lib/dpkg/status

The simple trick now is to find all packages which have only /var/lib/dpkg/status as associated system file (that doesn t refer to what packages contain), an not an index file representing a package source. There s a little pitfall: that s truth also for virtual packages. But virtual packages commonly don t have an associated version (python-apt docs: to check whether a package is virtual; that is, it has no versions and is provided at least once ), and that can be queried by Package.has_versions. A filter to find out any packages that aren t virtual packages, are solely associated to one system file, and that file is /var/lib/dpkg/status, then goes like this:

for package in cache.packages:
    if package.has_versions:
        version = mydepcache.get_candidate_ver(package)
        if len(version.file_list) == 1:
            if 'dpkg/status' in version.file_list[0][0].filename:
                print(package.name)

On my Debian testing system this puts out a quite interesting list. It lists all the wild packages like libcudnn5, but also packages which are recently not in testing because they have been temporarily removed by AUTORM due to release critical bugs. Then there s all the obsolete stuff which have been installed from the package archives once and then being forgotten like old kernel header packages ( obsolete packages in dselect). So this snippet brings up other stuff, too. Thus, this might be more experimental stuff so far, though.

This Valentine s Day I m giving everyone the gift of GIFs! Because who wants to stare at a bunch of code? Or read words?! I ll make this short and snappy since I m sure you re looking forward to a romantic night with your terminal. A script called create-raid already exists in the main repository so I decided to add an activity for that in the main menu.
Here s what the default activity for creating the master and subkeys will look like:

This activity should make key generation faster and more convenient for the user. The dialog allows the user to enter additional UIDs at the same time as she initially creates the keys (there s another activity for adding UIDs later). The dialog won t ask for a comment in the UID, just name and email. The input boxes come with some defaults that were outlined in the wiki for this project, such as rsa4096 for the master and 1y for the expiry. However the user can still enter her own values for fields like algo and expiry. The user won t customize usage here, though. There should be separate activities for creating a custom primary and custom subkeys. Here, the user creates a master key [SC], an encryption key [E], and optionally an additional signing [SC], encryption [E], and authentication key [A]. The last three weeks of the internship will consist of implementing more of the frontend dialogs for the activities in the main menu, validating user input, and testing. Thanks for reading <3