8 ms·

Almost everyone developing Tor was or is funded by the US government (2014)

76 points by mimixco 8y ago

cphoover 8y ago
Isn't tor and its protocol open source though? Can't anyone inspect the code that powers it, fork it, create their own network if they want to?
- amadeuspagel 8y ago
  For this to work, you'd convince millions of people to use your forked protocol. A network that only you and your friends use doesn't give you much anonymity.
- uberswe 8y ago
  Sure but it's a lot of code to go through and it's not the only problem. What if the majority of the nodes are from the NSA?
  - cphoover 8y ago
    Is there any circumstantial or direct evidence to support that or is that just speculation? If confidence is decreased in the network (e.g. due to an intelligence leak) there is no reason a new network could not supplant it
  - belorn 8y ago
    > What if the majority of the nodes are from the NSA? While nothing can prove definitively anything, we do have https://metrics.torproject.org/bubbles.html#country https://metrics.torproject.org/bubbles.html#country and the directory of relay nodes are in the open. One can simply pull the list and compare them to any geo-ip database.
    - jacobwg 8y ago
      I think this claim is about nodes controlled by the NSA, not about nodes housed inside the US. Presumably the NSA could be in control of servers hosted in other geographies.
- walrus01 8y ago
  The easiest way is to just run a fuckton of exit nodes, and do traffic analysis. With a $20 million annual budget to buy commercial hosting services/colo from ISPs worldwide I could easily have >50% of all high bandwidth exit nodes in existence. That's chump change for a national intelligence agency of a five eyes nation.
  - TLAFanBoy 8y ago
    Consider that the Tor Foundation itself may have been started by NSA agents and collaborators. Tor was originally invented for the US Navy, after all. There's a foundation that provides legal representation to "average people" who want to run Tor exit nodes. I read a study of Tor exit nodes in Germany and they are all financed and legally represented by a foundation that, to my eyes at least, is obviously a CIA front. The CIA has been doing things like this since forever. Many of the "storied journalists" of the late 20th century were CIA propagandists. It would be trivially easy for the CIA to turn one of their own assets into a "privacy celebrity." They would go around giving conferences to "privacy advocates" and techies, spinning yarns about their "dedication to user privacy" and the average person would believe it. In fact, the CIA, in the 1950s, used a personality test heuristic that could identify narcissists and liars and would recruit these people to insert into various "movements." I actually do find it rather amusing when I read comments from seemingly well meaning techies praising some celebrity "privacy activist" that travels around the country giving TED talks and the like, promoting various privacy technology initiatives, never once even considering that it's quite likely that celebrity is working for the NSA and simply mouths all the "progressive" and "cyber-libertarian" talking points that sell the idea to idealists. Idealists are easily manipulated because they "want to believe." The Three Letter Agencies are "people hackers" more than "technology hackers" and the average techie-type doesn't have a clue. tl;dr the entire "electronic privacy movement" is likely astroturf run by the intelligence community.
    - mimixco 8y ago
      Very true. I'd recommend Yasha Levine's (the post author's) book Surveillance Valley for anyone interested in this topic. You'll notice any web posts about "how to get on the dark web" suggest Tor. Uh, huh.
- mimixco 8y ago
  It's by operating the exit nodes that they can see the traffic.
Coffeewine 8y ago
Dumb question - is the supposition then that HTTPS is completely broken as well? Or is it merely that the NSA will be able to see who tor users are talking to, if not what they say?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
FiloSottile 8y ago
This is old (2014) FUD about funding sources, which are obviously public like for any other 501c3.
- _red 8y ago
  Moreover it lazily conflates the exploits (javascript/http/websocket unmasking) and implies it was an intentional vulnerability in the protocol itself.
  - SCHiM 8y ago
    Indeed, a number of examples cited are not vulnerabilities in TOR. The example of the bomb threat is one such, that person was unmasked by looking at the means, motive and opportunity of all suspects. TOR wont help you if the initial suspect pool is already very small (people that took that exam at that time) (motive). And only one student connected to TOR on premise during the time of the threat (opportunity, means).
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
superobserver 8y ago
Relatively undergeneralized as the entirety of the internet's traffic is collected by various agencies, and singling out the NSA seems rather hamfisted.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  Tor is in their demense so critcism is always relevant - dismissal on those grounds is whataboutism. It would be like dismissing DES S-box tampering or Elliptical Curve insecurity with "there are plenty of insecure algorithm mistakes no big deal!". It brings to mind how answering strongly agree on "Everyone steals" on a company screening personality test is a quick ticket to get blacklisted.
  - superobserver 8y ago
    I didn't justify the NSA nor 'dismiss', I said everyone does it, so singling them out in particular is dishonest. Furthermore, it is their mandate to do what they do; ask yourself: which agencies exist that have attempted to extend beyond the scope of theirs? This is a serious concern, esp. in diplomatic relations.
    - Nasrudith 8y ago
      Well they were responsible for Tor that makes it germane - that was what I met by being in their domain. It is always perfectly fair to throw shade on them for their project based on their past actions. The NSA really shouldn't be bringing up their mandate given how they have persistently undermined their own nation's security for the sake of snooping. And it is one of the most economically dependent upon it no less and needs the advanced economy to power its supremacy. It is so stupid one needs to invent elaborate and absurd fantasies to remotely justify it. It still stinks of whataboutism to complain of dishonesty - not refuting the truth or justifying it as right but deflecting it and crying foul. Everyone is doing it is a poor excuse for juvenile delinquency and a worse one for agencies of world powers.
- mimixco 8y ago
  There are three points here: First, Tor was and continues to be funded by the NSA, among other government agencies. Second, the NSA created Tor for themselves to protect their own agents. Third, by operating Tor exit nodes, they are able to spy on other people's traffic, hence a honeypot.
hubb 8y ago
for anyone who isn't already familiar with yasha levine -- suffice to say that he is not qualified to discuss the technical capabilities of tor
- tdhz77 8y ago
  Can you elaborate? I'm not familiar.
  - mimixco 8y ago
    He wrote Surveillance Valley. I think he's quite qualified to comment on it.
    - inn_shopper 8y ago
      Dan Brown wrote Da Vinci Code, but I don't think he's qualified to talk about the history.
      - mimixco 8y ago
        The Da Vinci Code is a fictional novel. Levine's book is well researched and he cites his sources. Is he despised on HN because he's Russian? That would be xenophobic. Is there something else about him that I'm missing?
        inn_shopper 8y ago
        Why you have to point out his nationality?
tdhz77 8y ago
Both FBI & Tor are on Honeypots. I remember this article, https://www.wired.com/2015/04/silk-road-1/ https://www.wired.com/2015/04/silk-road-1/ which confirms the FBI tactics of setting up exit nodes.
mimixco 8y ago
OP here... Any guesses why this was flagged? Yasha Levine is the author of Surveillance Valley, a well-reviewed book that covers this topic extensively.
- zigzaggy 8y ago
  I’ve seen this information discussed here before (1) and the response was pretty hostile. I’m not sure why the article was flagged but I find this topic extremely relevant to our community. No use throwing the baby out with the bath water. Makes me wonder - who would benefit from not having this conversation? 1.https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12826863 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12826863
  - TLAFanBoy 8y ago
    >the response was pretty hostile. >who would benefit from not having this conversation? The companies that have a vested financial interest in mass surveillance, their technical employees, the public communication platform for the investment funds that fund startups in this space (cough) and the intelligence agencies that work directly with, and are sometimes embedded in, those technology companies. Imagine if someone did find some exploit in Tor code, it would go over the head of 99% of coders anyway, and the accusations of "Russian hacking" would drown out most sensible discussion anyway.
    - perl4ever 8y ago
      It would really advance your viewpoint more, if you waited for someone else to bring up "Russian hacking" and then accused them of "whataboutism". I don't know anything about the conspiracy that runs everything, but it is hard to believe that it involves the CIA, NSA, or the Russian equivalents, because they are demonized so much. The real rulers of the world must hate those entities. Anyone that is scapegoated by millions must be a diversion.
- exolymph 8y ago
  I didn't flag the link, but fwiw Yasha Levine is not a good person. An incident from a while ago: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ae3n8p/that-time-a-tor-developer-doxxed-a-troll https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ae3n8p/that-time-... (Disclaimer: Andrea Shepard is an internet friend of mine)
Tepix 8y ago
So, do i need to change the tor client configuration to not favor fast (exit) nodes as much?
zigzaggy 8y ago
This article is from 2014. I did a lot of research on this a few years ago, and found plenty of circumstantial evidence that either (a) TOR is a honeypot, or (b) a large % of users have bad OPSEC, or (c) both a and b are true. Because of “parallel construction” (1) it will always be difficult to really get to the bottom of this issue. I’m not sure we’re ever safe from the prying eyes of nation states. We should all assume we’re never totally secure, and act accordingly. But I get “burnt out” on the level of paranoia necessary for that kind of research. I’m also exhausted from trying to convince others to wake up from their apathy over privacy and security. Security is a process that requires continuous improvement. New exploits, new information, and new technology will never stop affecting our security postures. I accept that I will miss things, get breached, and improve over time. For whistle-blowers, spies, and criminals, breaches have much more severe consequences. But it’s going to happen to them as part of the “job.” Cat-and-mouse, I suppose. Anyway, I assume Tor isn’t secure, because no networks are secure. 1.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
- qnsi 8y ago
  Most people just simply dont care. Take Facebook for example. I heard from multiple people telling me they think FB listens to them and show them ads about what they talk about. I ask them, will they stop using FB because of it? No! All my friends use Facebook. There is no hope for our world. Facebook Google can do whatever they want. Why would people care about government spying on them?
  - NoPicklez 8y ago
    You need to remember that the data world we live in today is very new. And the understanding of data privacy and its implications are mostly only understood by those in the realm of technology. For the average person knowing that Facebook listens to them and shows them ads about what they search and talk about, probably doesn't care because they don't know what the impact is to them, or perhaps they don't see an immediate impact. Realistically, in the world of surrounding problems and concerns that we each have in our daily lives, Facebook showing me ads based on what I search for is probably quite low on the list. I work in IT & Cyber risk and one thing I have learnt is that just because something sounds bad doesn't mean it realistically is. Everyone of us lives in a world of risks that are individual to each of us each day, some risks we rate higher than others for various reasons based on their consequence and likelihood. Therefore for a risk to be large enough for people to take action or mitigate, it needs to have a tangible impact on people's lives first and foremost. People have different risk appetites and therefore I may choose to mitigate the risk by putting less information into my Facebook account, you may choose to completely stop using the service and delete your account. I could talk all day about the potential reasons why its a bad idea for Facebook to provide advertisements based on search history. But I don't have enough time in the day to take into account everything that people say I should care about as much as each person thinks I should.
ngcc_hk 8y ago
The whole point are to have a lot of traffic not belong to military but military can use. Also everyone will try to break it as it is a much high value network. And there are ways to do so eg in exit and enter where you are not protected. Seems nothing wrong. No one guarantee anything.
HardLuckLabs 8y ago
Old news, but I'm still not a big fan of TOR, primarily because they've conflated the difference between anonymity and privacy on a network. You can't have it both ways. Either I can provide guarantees about the integrity and authenticity of traffic happening between your machine and a destination, or I can provide an unprovable, probabilistic claim that it's "anonymous".
stunt 8y ago
Right to privacy and freedom from surveillance is a dream.
- tenebrisalietum 8y ago
  It's attainable if you are in a recognized higher social class, which often correlates with having much wealth.
LinuxBender 8y ago
The initial iteration of the internet was also funded by the US government via DARPA. DARPA was also partially responsible for the US Interstate Highway System.
rcchyssser 8y ago
I did a lot of research on this a few years ago and everyone involved is paranoid.
miccah 8y ago
I remember hearing about this on a Security Now episode [1]. Just because the US government funds the project does not mean they dictate features. Here is a quote from Roger Dingledine (co-founder of Tor) found in [1]: "I should take a brief moment to explain how funding proposals work, for those who worry that governments come to us wanting to pay us to do something bad. There is never any point where someone comes to us and says, 'I'll pay you X to do Y.' The way it works is that we try to find groups with funding for the general area that we want to work on, and then we go to them with a specific plan for what we'd like to do and how much it would cost for us to do that, and if we're lucky they say okay." [1] https://www.grc.com/sn/sn-693.txt https://www.grc.com/sn/sn-693.txt

76 points by mimixco 8y ago

Isn't tor and its protocol open source though? Can't anyone inspect the code that powers it, fork it, create their own network if they want to?

amadeuspagel 8y ago
For this to work, you'd convince millions of people to use your forked protocol. A network that only you and your friends use doesn't give you much anonymity.
uberswe 8y ago
Sure but it's a lot of code to go through and it's not the only problem. What if the majority of the nodes are from the NSA?
- cphoover 8y ago
  Is there any circumstantial or direct evidence to support that or is that just speculation? If confidence is decreased in the network (e.g. due to an intelligence leak) there is no reason a new network could not supplant it
- belorn 8y ago
  > What if the majority of the nodes are from the NSA? While nothing can prove definitively anything, we do have https://metrics.torproject.org/bubbles.html#country https://metrics.torproject.org/bubbles.html#country and the directory of relay nodes are in the open. One can simply pull the list and compare them to any geo-ip database.
  - jacobwg 8y ago
    I think this claim is about nodes controlled by the NSA, not about nodes housed inside the US. Presumably the NSA could be in control of servers hosted in other geographies.
walrus01 8y ago
The easiest way is to just run a fuckton of exit nodes, and do traffic analysis. With a $20 million annual budget to buy commercial hosting services/colo from ISPs worldwide I could easily have >50% of all high bandwidth exit nodes in existence. That's chump change for a national intelligence agency of a five eyes nation.
- TLAFanBoy 8y ago
  Consider that the Tor Foundation itself may have been started by NSA agents and collaborators. Tor was originally invented for the US Navy, after all. There's a foundation that provides legal representation to "average people" who want to run Tor exit nodes. I read a study of Tor exit nodes in Germany and they are all financed and legally represented by a foundation that, to my eyes at least, is obviously a CIA front. The CIA has been doing things like this since forever. Many of the "storied journalists" of the late 20th century were CIA propagandists. It would be trivially easy for the CIA to turn one of their own assets into a "privacy celebrity." They would go around giving conferences to "privacy advocates" and techies, spinning yarns about their "dedication to user privacy" and the average person would believe it. In fact, the CIA, in the 1950s, used a personality test heuristic that could identify narcissists and liars and would recruit these people to insert into various "movements." I actually do find it rather amusing when I read comments from seemingly well meaning techies praising some celebrity "privacy activist" that travels around the country giving TED talks and the like, promoting various privacy technology initiatives, never once even considering that it's quite likely that celebrity is working for the NSA and simply mouths all the "progressive" and "cyber-libertarian" talking points that sell the idea to idealists. Idealists are easily manipulated because they "want to believe." The Three Letter Agencies are "people hackers" more than "technology hackers" and the average techie-type doesn't have a clue. tl;dr the entire "electronic privacy movement" is likely astroturf run by the intelligence community.
  - mimixco 8y ago
    Very true. I'd recommend Yasha Levine's (the post author's) book Surveillance Valley for anyone interested in this topic. You'll notice any web posts about "how to get on the dark web" suggest Tor. Uh, huh.
mimixco 8y ago
It's by operating the exit nodes that they can see the traffic.

Coffeewine 8y ago

Dumb question - is the supposition then that HTTPS is completely broken as well? Or is it merely that the NSA will be able to see who tor users are talking to, if not what they say?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

FiloSottile 8y ago

This is old (2014) FUD about funding sources, which are obviously public like for any other 501c3.

_red 8y ago
Moreover it lazily conflates the exploits (javascript/http/websocket unmasking) and implies it was an intentional vulnerability in the protocol itself.
- SCHiM 8y ago
  Indeed, a number of examples cited are not vulnerabilities in TOR. The example of the bomb threat is one such, that person was unmasked by looking at the means, motive and opportunity of all suspects. TOR wont help you if the initial suspect pool is already very small (people that took that exam at that time) (motive). And only one student connected to TOR on premise during the time of the threat (opportunity, means).

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

superobserver 8y ago

Relatively undergeneralized as the entirety of the internet's traffic is collected by various agencies, and singling out the NSA seems rather hamfisted.

Nasrudith 8y ago
Tor is in their demense so critcism is always relevant - dismissal on those grounds is whataboutism. It would be like dismissing DES S-box tampering or Elliptical Curve insecurity with "there are plenty of insecure algorithm mistakes no big deal!". It brings to mind how answering strongly agree on "Everyone steals" on a company screening personality test is a quick ticket to get blacklisted.
- superobserver 8y ago
  I didn't justify the NSA nor 'dismiss', I said everyone does it, so singling them out in particular is dishonest. Furthermore, it is their mandate to do what they do; ask yourself: which agencies exist that have attempted to extend beyond the scope of theirs? This is a serious concern, esp. in diplomatic relations.
  - Nasrudith 8y ago
    Well they were responsible for Tor that makes it germane - that was what I met by being in their domain. It is always perfectly fair to throw shade on them for their project based on their past actions. The NSA really shouldn't be bringing up their mandate given how they have persistently undermined their own nation's security for the sake of snooping. And it is one of the most economically dependent upon it no less and needs the advanced economy to power its supremacy. It is so stupid one needs to invent elaborate and absurd fantasies to remotely justify it. It still stinks of whataboutism to complain of dishonesty - not refuting the truth or justifying it as right but deflecting it and crying foul. Everyone is doing it is a poor excuse for juvenile delinquency and a worse one for agencies of world powers.
mimixco 8y ago
There are three points here: First, Tor was and continues to be funded by the NSA, among other government agencies. Second, the NSA created Tor for themselves to protect their own agents. Third, by operating Tor exit nodes, they are able to spy on other people's traffic, hence a honeypot.

hubb 8y ago

for anyone who isn't already familiar with yasha levine -- suffice to say that he is not qualified to discuss the technical capabilities of tor

tdhz77 8y ago
Can you elaborate? I'm not familiar.
- mimixco 8y ago
  He wrote Surveillance Valley. I think he's quite qualified to comment on it.
  - inn_shopper 8y ago
    Dan Brown wrote Da Vinci Code, but I don't think he's qualified to talk about the history.
    - mimixco 8y ago
      The Da Vinci Code is a fictional novel. Levine's book is well researched and he cites his sources. Is he despised on HN because he's Russian? That would be xenophobic. Is there something else about him that I'm missing?
      - inn_shopper 8y ago
        Why you have to point out his nationality?

tdhz77 8y ago

Both FBI & Tor are on Honeypots. I remember this article, https://www.wired.com/2015/04/silk-road-1/ https://www.wired.com/2015/04/silk-road-1/ which confirms the FBI tactics of setting up exit nodes.

mimixco 8y ago

OP here... Any guesses why this was flagged? Yasha Levine is the author of Surveillance Valley, a well-reviewed book that covers this topic extensively.

zigzaggy 8y ago
I’ve seen this information discussed here before (1) and the response was pretty hostile. I’m not sure why the article was flagged but I find this topic extremely relevant to our community. No use throwing the baby out with the bath water. Makes me wonder - who would benefit from not having this conversation? 1.https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12826863 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12826863
- TLAFanBoy 8y ago
  >the response was pretty hostile. >who would benefit from not having this conversation? The companies that have a vested financial interest in mass surveillance, their technical employees, the public communication platform for the investment funds that fund startups in this space (cough) and the intelligence agencies that work directly with, and are sometimes embedded in, those technology companies. Imagine if someone did find some exploit in Tor code, it would go over the head of 99% of coders anyway, and the accusations of "Russian hacking" would drown out most sensible discussion anyway.
  - perl4ever 8y ago
    It would really advance your viewpoint more, if you waited for someone else to bring up "Russian hacking" and then accused them of "whataboutism". I don't know anything about the conspiracy that runs everything, but it is hard to believe that it involves the CIA, NSA, or the Russian equivalents, because they are demonized so much. The real rulers of the world must hate those entities. Anyone that is scapegoated by millions must be a diversion.
exolymph 8y ago
I didn't flag the link, but fwiw Yasha Levine is not a good person. An incident from a while ago: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ae3n8p/that-time-a-tor-developer-doxxed-a-troll https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ae3n8p/that-time-... (Disclaimer: Andrea Shepard is an internet friend of mine)

Tepix 8y ago

So, do i need to change the tor client configuration to not favor fast (exit) nodes as much?

zigzaggy 8y ago

This article is from 2014. I did a lot of research on this a few years ago, and found plenty of circumstantial evidence that either (a) TOR is a honeypot, or (b) a large % of users have bad OPSEC, or (c) both a and b are true. Because of “parallel construction” (1) it will always be difficult to really get to the bottom of this issue. I’m not sure we’re ever safe from the prying eyes of nation states. We should all assume we’re never totally secure, and act accordingly. But I get “burnt out” on the level of paranoia necessary for that kind of research. I’m also exhausted from trying to convince others to wake up from their apathy over privacy and security. Security is a process that requires continuous improvement. New exploits, new information, and new technology will never stop affecting our security postures. I accept that I will miss things, get breached, and improve over time. For whistle-blowers, spies, and criminals, breaches have much more severe consequences. But it’s going to happen to them as part of the “job.” Cat-and-mouse, I suppose. Anyway, I assume Tor isn’t secure, because no networks are secure. 1.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

qnsi 8y ago
Most people just simply dont care. Take Facebook for example. I heard from multiple people telling me they think FB listens to them and show them ads about what they talk about. I ask them, will they stop using FB because of it? No! All my friends use Facebook. There is no hope for our world. Facebook Google can do whatever they want. Why would people care about government spying on them?
- NoPicklez 8y ago
  You need to remember that the data world we live in today is very new. And the understanding of data privacy and its implications are mostly only understood by those in the realm of technology. For the average person knowing that Facebook listens to them and shows them ads about what they search and talk about, probably doesn't care because they don't know what the impact is to them, or perhaps they don't see an immediate impact. Realistically, in the world of surrounding problems and concerns that we each have in our daily lives, Facebook showing me ads based on what I search for is probably quite low on the list. I work in IT & Cyber risk and one thing I have learnt is that just because something sounds bad doesn't mean it realistically is. Everyone of us lives in a world of risks that are individual to each of us each day, some risks we rate higher than others for various reasons based on their consequence and likelihood. Therefore for a risk to be large enough for people to take action or mitigate, it needs to have a tangible impact on people's lives first and foremost. People have different risk appetites and therefore I may choose to mitigate the risk by putting less information into my Facebook account, you may choose to completely stop using the service and delete your account. I could talk all day about the potential reasons why its a bad idea for Facebook to provide advertisements based on search history. But I don't have enough time in the day to take into account everything that people say I should care about as much as each person thinks I should.

ngcc_hk 8y ago

The whole point are to have a lot of traffic not belong to military but military can use. Also everyone will try to break it as it is a much high value network. And there are ways to do so eg in exit and enter where you are not protected. Seems nothing wrong. No one guarantee anything.

HardLuckLabs 8y ago

Old news, but I'm still not a big fan of TOR, primarily because they've conflated the difference between anonymity and privacy on a network. You can't have it both ways. Either I can provide guarantees about the integrity and authenticity of traffic happening between your machine and a destination, or I can provide an unprovable, probabilistic claim that it's "anonymous".

stunt 8y ago

Right to privacy and freedom from surveillance is a dream.

tenebrisalietum 8y ago
It's attainable if you are in a recognized higher social class, which often correlates with having much wealth.

LinuxBender 8y ago

The initial iteration of the internet was also funded by the US government via DARPA. DARPA was also partially responsible for the US Interstate Highway System.

rcchyssser 8y ago

I did a lot of research on this a few years ago and everyone involved is paranoid.

miccah 8y ago

I remember hearing about this on a Security Now episode [1]. Just because the US government funds the project does not mean they dictate features. Here is a quote from Roger Dingledine (co-founder of Tor) found in [1]: "I should take a brief moment to explain how funding proposals work, for those who worry that governments come to us wanting to pay us to do something bad. There is never any point where someone comes to us and says, 'I'll pay you X to do Y.' The way it works is that we try to find groups with funding for the general area that we want to work on, and then we go to them with a specific plan for what we'd like to do and how much it would cost for us to do that, and if we're lucky they say okay." [1] https://www.grc.com/sn/sn-693.txt https://www.grc.com/sn/sn-693.txt