Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #238712 > unrolled thread

Issues with Bullseye

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Issues with Bullseye Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2021-08-15 11:40 +0200
    Re: Issues with Bullseye Eike Lantzsch ZP6CGE <zp6cge@gmx.net> - 2021-08-15 12:10 +0200
      Re: Issues with Bullseye Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2021-08-15 13:20 +0200
    Re: Issues with Bullseye Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2021-08-15 12:30 +0200
    Re: Issues with Bullseye Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-08-15 15:20 +0200
      Re: Issues with Bullseye Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2021-08-15 16:20 +0200
        Re: Issues with Bullseye Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-08-15 16:40 +0200
          Re: Issues with Bullseye David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-08-15 17:00 +0200
            Re: Issues with Bullseye Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-08-16 16:20 +0200
              Re: Issues with Bullseye Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-08-17 11:50 +0200
          Re: Issues with Bullseye Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2021-08-15 17:00 +0200
            Re: Issues with Bullseye Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com> - 2021-08-15 17:00 +0200
              Re: Issues with Bullseye Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2021-08-15 17:20 +0200
            Re: Issues with Bullseye Frank <zuiderduin@gmx.com> - 2021-08-15 17:20 +0200
            Re: Issues with Bullseye Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-08-20 19:00 +0200
              Re: Issues with Bullseye Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2021-08-20 19:30 +0200
    [SOLVED] Re: Issues with Bullseye Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2021-08-15 18:10 +0200
      Re: [SOLVED] Re: Issues with Bullseye Frank <zuiderduin@gmx.com> - 2021-08-15 18:20 +0200
        Re: [SOLVED] Re: Issues with Bullseye Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2021-08-15 18:30 +0200

#238712 — Issues with Bullseye

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Dear list,

since the release of bullseye I got into two issues.

1. the pgp-key of the repo are no more valid. 

Is there a new one? How to get?

2.  deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib non-free
is not reachable. 

Is it down? How can it be fixed?

Another thing besides this: I am wondering, why the debian documentation differs 
between http and https at the entries for the security and the normal
packages. I would have been expected, that all entries are using https, and no more 
http. Any special reoson for it or is it just a forgotten change?

Best regards

Hans  

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#238713

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sonntag, 15. August 2021 05:36:54 -04 Hans wrote:
> Dear list,
>
> since the release of bullseye I got into two issues.
>
> 1. the pgp-key of the repo are no more valid.
>
> Is there a new one? How to get?
>
> 2.  deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib
> non-free is not reachable.
>
> Is it down? How can it be fixed?
>
> Another thing besides this: I am wondering, why the debian
> documentation differs between http and https at the entries for the
> security and the normal packages. I would have been expected, that
> all entries are using https, and no more http. Any special reoson for
> it or is it just a forgotten change?
>
> Best regards
>
> Hans
Hi Hans!
Hope you are well


1)  you need to copy the keys into /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d
there is no apt-keyring package anymore

see here:

*5.3.2. Deprecated components for bullseye*
With the next release of Debian 12 (codenamed bookworm) some features will be
deprecated. Users will need to migrate to other alternatives to prevent trouble when
updating to Debian 12.
This includes the following features:
     *  The historical justifications for the filesystem layout with */bin*, */sbin*, and */
lib* directories separate from their equivalents under */usr* no longer apply today; see
the Freedesktop.org summary[1]. Debian bullseye will be the last Debian release that
supports the non-merged-usr layout; for systems with a legacy layout that have been
upgraded without a reinstall, the *usrmerge* package exists to do the conversion if
desired.
     *  bullseye is the final Debian release to ship *apt-key*. Keys should be managed by
dropping files into */etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d* instead, in binary format as created by *gpg --
export* with a *.gpg* extension, or ASCII armored with a *.asc* extension.
A replacement for *apt-key list* to manually investigate the keyring is planned, but work
has not started yet.

2) see here:


*Clint Adams: upgrayedd[2]*
*Date:*14.08.21 07:27
--------------------
[3]
Mom,
When you upgrade to bullseye, you need[4] to change your security source from
deb http://security.debian.org/ buster/updates main
to
deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main
However, that will silently fail to work if you forget to update the file in /etc/apt/
preferences.d to add something like this stanza:
Explanation: Debian security
Package: *
Pin: release o=Debian,n=bullseye-security
Pin-Priority: 990
Posted on 2021-08-14
Tags: quanks[5]

and here:

*5.1.3. Changed security archive layout*
For bullseye, the security suite is now named *bullseye-security* instead of */codename//
updates* and users should adapt their APT source-list files accordingly when upgrading.
The security line in your APT configuration may look like:
deb https://deb.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main contrib
If your APT configuration also involves pinning or *APT::Default-Release*, it is likely to
require adjustments as the codename of the security archive no longer matches that of
the regular archive. An example of a working *APT::Default-Release* line for bullseye
looks like:
APT::Default-Release "/^bullseye(|-security|-updates)$/";
which takes advantage of the undocumented feature of APT that it supports regular
expressions (inside */*).
Cheers
Eike ZP6CGE

--------
[1] https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/TheCaseForTheUsrMerge
[2] https://xana.scru.org/posts/quanks/bullseye.html
[3] http://planet.debian.org/heads/clint.png
[4] https://www.debian.org/releases/bullseye/amd64/release-notes/ch-information.en.html#security-archive
[5] https://xana.scru.org/tags/quanks.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238718

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi Eike, 


it is not that easy and sadly this does not work. I copied the Release.gpg to /etc/apt/
trusted.gpg.d/ and renamed it to "debian-archive-bullseye-stable.gpg".


I also get lots of errors, since bullseye chaged something. Please see:


-------------------- snip -----------------------------
LANG=C aptitude update
    
Hit http://deb.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security InRelease 
Hit http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/cabelo/Debian_10  InRelease 
                           
Hit http://downloads.metasploit.com/data/releases/metasploit-framework/apt lucid 
InRelease 
Hit https://deb.opera.com/opera-stable stable InRelease 
                                                   
Err https://ftp.de.debian.org/debian stable InRelease 
                                       
Certificate verification failed: The certificate is NOT trusted. The name in the certificate 
does not match the expected.  Could not handshake: Error in the certificate verification. 
[IP: 141.76.2.4 443] 
Hit https://updates.signal.org/desktop/apt xenial InRelease 
                                               
Hit https://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/tabos-team/Debian_10  InRelease 
       
Hit https://www.kismetwireless.net/repos/apt/release/buster buster InRelease 
W: http://deb.debian.org/debian-security/dists/bullseye-security/InRelease: The key(s) in 
the keyring /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/debian-archive-bullseye-stable.gpg are ignored as the 
file has an unsupported filetype. 
W: http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/cabelo/Debian_10/InRelease: The 
key(s) in the keyring /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/debian-archive-bullseye-stable.gpg are 
ignored as the file has an unsupported filety
pe. 
W: http://downloads.metasploit.com/data/releases/metasploit-framework/apt/dists/lucid/
InRelease: The key(s) in the keyring /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/debian-archive-bullseye-
stable.gpg are ignored as the file has an 
unsupported filetype. 
W: https://deb.opera.com/opera-stable/dists/stable/InRelease: The key(s) in the keyring /
etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/debian-archive-bullseye-stable.gpg are ignored as the file has an 
unsupported filetype. 
W: https://updates.signal.org/desktop/apt/dists/xenial/InRelease: The key(s) in the keyring 
/etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/debian-archive-bullseye-stable.gpg are ignored as the file has an 
unsupported filetype. 
W: https://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/tabos-team/Debian_10/InRelease: 
The key(s) in the keyring /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/debian-archive-bullseye-stable.gpg are 
ignored as the file has an unsupported filetype. 
W: https://www.kismetwireless.net/repos/apt/release/buster/dists/buster/InRelease: The 
key(s) in the keyring /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/debian-archive-bullseye-stable.gpg are 
ignored as the file has an unsupported filetype. 
W: Failed to fetch https://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/dists/stable/InRelease: Certificate 
verification failed: The certificate is NOT trusted. The name in the certificate does not 
match the expected.  Could not handshake: Error in the certificate verification. [IP: 
141.76.2.4 443] 
W: Some index files failed to download. They have been ignored, or old ones used 
instead.


--------------- snap --------------------
It looks like the other prior working keys now also do no more match.


Is there a solution for it? Tried also gpg --export, but did not work, too.


Best regards


Hans (DL4OCJ)
 


> Hi Hans!
> Hope you are well
> 
> 
> 1)  you need to copy the keys into /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d
> there is no apt-keyring package anymore
> 
> see here:
> 
> *5.3.2. Deprecated components for bullseye*
> With the next release of Debian 12 (codenamed bookworm) some features will
> be deprecated. Users will need to migrate to other alternatives to prevent
> trouble when updating to Debian 12.
> This includes the following features:
>      *  The historical justifications for the filesystem layout with */bin*,
> */sbin*, and */ lib* directories separate from their equivalents under
> */usr* no longer apply today; see the Freedesktop.org summary[1]. Debian
> bullseye will be the last Debian release that supports the non-merged-usr
> layout; for systems with a legacy layout that have been upgraded without a
> reinstall, the *usrmerge* package exists to do the conversion if desired.
>      *  bullseye is the final Debian release to ship *apt-key*. Keys should
> be managed by dropping files into */etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d* instead, in
> binary format as created by *gpg -- export* with a *.gpg* extension, or
> ASCII armored with a *.asc* extension. A replacement for *apt-key list* to
> manually investigate the keyring is planned, but work has not started yet.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238714

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

* 2021-08-15 11:36:54+0200, Hans wrote:

> 2.  deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib non-free
> is not reachable. 

When upgrading a Debian system you should always read the release notes.
https://www.debian.org/releases/bullseye/amd64/release-notes/

Section 4.2.7 says:


    4.2.7. The security section

    For APT source lines referencing the security archive, the format has
    changed slightly along with the release name, going from buster/updates
    to bullseye-security; see Section 5.1.3, “Changed security archive
    layout”.


The referred section says:


    5.1.3. Changed security archive layout

    For bullseye, the security suite is now named bullseye-security
    instead of codename/updates and users should adapt their APT
    source-list files accordingly when upgrading.

    The security line in your APT configuration may look like:

    deb https://deb.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main contrib

    [...]

-- 
/// Teemu Likonen - .-.. https://www.iki.fi/tlikonen/
// OpenPGP: 4E1055DC84E9DFF613D78557719D69D324539450

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238724

On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 11:36:54 +0200, Hans wrote:

[...]

> Another thing besides this: I am wondering, why the debian documentation differs 
> between http and https at the entries for the security and the normal
> packages. I would have been expected, that all entries are using https, and no more 
> http. Any special reoson for it or is it just a forgotten change?

Does

 https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/90227/why-is-there-no-https-transport-for-debian-apt-tool

address your query?

An excerpt from the page:

  Debian doesn't make HTTPS downloads easy because there is very little
  benefit. Debian package distribution already includes a mechanism to
  verify packages: all packages are signed with Gpg.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238731

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Yeah, not quite. I was already aware, that https won't improve security much.

I just wondered, why the docu once is telling "use https" and once "http". If 
only using https or either http, this would not create confuseness.

Looks like I am too critical. am I not? :)

Best regards

Hans



> Does
> 
>  https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/90227/why-is-there-no-https-transp
> ort-for-debian-apt-tool
> 
> address your query?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238733

On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 16:13:51 +0200, Hans wrote:

> Yeah, not quite. I was already aware, that https won't improve security much.
> 
> I just wondered, why the docu once is telling "use https" and once "http". If 
> only using https or either http, this would not create confuseness.
> 
> Looks like I am too critical. am I not? :)

There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
technical matters :).

A link to the page you were looking at might help.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238740

On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 15:36:05 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 16:13:51 +0200, Hans wrote:
> 
> > Yeah, not quite. I was already aware, that https won't improve security much.
> > 
> > I just wondered, why the docu once is telling "use https" and once "http". If 
> > only using https or either http, this would not create confuseness.
> > 
> > Looks like I am too critical. am I not? :)
> 
> There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
> technical matters :).
> 
> A link to the page you were looking at might help.

I assume this refers to § 5.1.3 in the Release Notes.

A browser has no problem reaching the site with/without the http"s",
but I don't know about APT. However, the OP had the (usual) syntax
error, so that may be the cause of their specific problem.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238822

On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 09:52:01 -0500, David Wright wrote:

> On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 15:36:05 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 16:13:51 +0200, Hans wrote:
> > 
> > > Yeah, not quite. I was already aware, that https won't improve security much.
> > > 
> > > I just wondered, why the docu once is telling "use https" and once "http". If 
> > > only using https or either http, this would not create confuseness.
> > > 
> > > Looks like I am too critical. am I not? :)
> > 
> > There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
> > technical matters :).
> > 
> > A link to the page you were looking at might help.
> 
> I assume this refers to § 5.1.3 in the Release Notes.
> 
> A browser has no problem reaching the site with/without the http"s",
> but I don't know about APT. However, the OP had the (usual) syntax
> error, so that may be the cause of their specific problem.

I asked on -doc but there isn't any definitive answer yet. So then
I looked to see what the bullseye installer does when configuring
the package manager.

The protocol choice is still between http, https and ftp. I chose
http as I always have done. The lines put in /etc/apt/sources.list
both begin with http://.

Back to the menu and select https. No choice of country mirroe is
allowed. The only offering is deb.debian.org. I assume that is
because it is the only mirror that can be assumed to support https.
The security mirror is still http://... . The other is https://... .

My conclusion is that the line in § 5.1.3 in the Release Notes is
either an overenthusiastic entry or a typo. Either way the advice
there should really be consistent with what the installer does,
even if it does not lead to any problems.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238856

On Mon 16 Aug 2021 at 15:16:35 +0100, Brian wrote:

[...]

> My conclusion is that the line in § 5.1.3 in the Release Notes is
> either an overenthusiastic entry or a typo. Either way the advice
> there should really be consistent with what the installer does,
> even if it does not lead to any problems.

As sometimes happens...

  https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2021/08/msg00166.html

The URL http://deb.debian.org/debian-security points to the Fastly CDN,
which supports htps. hppts:// in place of http:// therefore shouldn't
lead to any problems.

Regarding cosustency: the prevailing opinion at

  https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=758316

is that

  It does not make sense to use https. All data is authenticated
  using GPG signatures. https only offers some encryption on top
  of that,...

The installer falls in with that view; the Release Notes doesn't.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238741

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 16:36:05 CEST schrieb Brian:
Yes, you are very right!
> 
> There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
> technical matters :).
> 
> A link to the page you were looking at might help.

To everyone:

I have still the problem, that the debian/bullsye repo can not be 
authenticated. Copying the Release.gpg from the repo to 
/etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/ did not help. 

Apt/Aptitude/apt-get is still telling me, it is the wrong format. I tried, to 
use gpg --export, but that did not work. 

Looked into the existing gpg files, they look not as Release.gpg. So I used --
dearmor, with no success.

It would really help, if there could be an upgraded debian-archive-keyring 
package or a little documentation, how to add/import the keys into 
trusted.gpg.d/ since apt-key does not work any more.

Simply copying does not work(!) and the documentation really lacks some 
information, which would help.

Or is it a bug? Should I file a bugreport?

Thanks for any hints.

Best regards

Hans

  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238742

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2021-08-15 10:51 a.m., Hans wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 16:36:05 CEST schrieb Brian:
> Yes, you are very right!
>>
>> There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
>> technical matters :).
>>
>> A link to the page you were looking at might help.
> 
> To everyone:
> 
> I have still the problem, that the debian/bullsye repo can not be 
> authenticated. Copying the Release.gpg from the repo to 
> /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/ did not help. 
Have you tried adding *[trusted=yes]* inside the sources.list file that
contain reference to this repository.
> 
> Apt/Aptitude/apt-get is still telling me, it is the wrong format. I tried, to 
> use gpg --export, but that did not work. 
> 
> Looked into the existing gpg files, they look not as Release.gpg. So I used --
> dearmor, with no success.
> 
> It would really help, if there could be an upgraded debian-archive-keyring 
> package or a little documentation, how to add/import the keys into 
> trusted.gpg.d/ since apt-key does not work any more.
> 
> Simply copying does not work(!) and the documentation really lacks some 
> information, which would help.
> 
> Or is it a bug? Should I file a bugreport?
> 
> Thanks for any hints.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Hans
> 
>   
> 

-- 
Polyna-Maude R.-Summerside
-Be smart, Be wise, Support opensource development

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238747

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Yes, but did not work.
Strangely, the entry for bullseye-security seem to work (as there is an 
existing key).

Best

Hans

> Have you tried adding *[trusted=yes]* inside the sources.list file that
> contain reference to this repository.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238746

Op 15-08-2021 om 16:51 schreef Hans:
> Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 16:36:05 CEST schrieb Brian:
> Yes, you are very right!
>>
>> There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
>> technical matters :).
>>
>> A link to the page you were looking at might help.
>
> To everyone:
>
> I have still the problem, that the debian/bullsye repo can not be
> authenticated. Copying the Release.gpg from the repo to
> /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/ did not help.

That doesn't surprise me. That's a signature, not a key.

> It would really help, if there could be an upgraded debian-archive-keyring
> package or a little documentation, how to add/import the keys into
> trusted.gpg.d/ since apt-key does not work any more.
>
> Simply copying does not work(!) and the documentation really lacks some
> information, which would help.

Simply copying works, if you use the correct file. If the key is
armored, make sure the extension is .asc. Otherwise it should be .gpg.

But downloading an up-to-date version (2021.1.1) of
debian-archive-keyring and installing that (using dpkg -i if necessary -
see below for a direct url) should suffice.

Regards,
Frank

http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/d/debian-archive-keyring/debian-archive-keyring_2021.1.1_all.deb

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#239092

On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 16:51:19 +0200, Hans wrote:

> Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 16:36:05 CEST schrieb Brian:
> Yes, you are very right!
> > 
> > There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
> > technical matters :).

Other may have been listening in to us [1]. One never knows what a
short remark leads to :).

 [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2021/08/msg00269.html

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#239095

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Am Freitag, 20. August 2021, 18:55:44 CEST schrieb Brian:
Yeah, looks like we woke a sleeping dog up. :)

Best

Hans

> On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 16:51:19 +0200, Hans wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 16:36:05 CEST schrieb Brian:
> > Yes, you are very right!
> > 
> > > There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
> > > technical matters :).
> 
> Other may have been listening in to us [1]. One never knows what a
> short remark leads to :).
> 
>  [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2021/08/msg00269.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238753 — [SOLVED] Re: Issues with Bullseye

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi all, 

discovered something. It looks like the keys are still not synced to the 
mirrors.

I changed from ftp.de.debian.org to deb.debian.org, and all is working like a 
charm.

So, I suppose, this issue might be solved. 

But it would be nice to add a package with the actual keys into the repo. The 
keys in the package "debian-archive-keyring" are too old (2012.1.1).

Thanks for all the help and have so much fun with debian! Its awesome!

Best regards

Hans
 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238755 — Re: [SOLVED] Re: Issues with Bullseye

Op 15-08-2021 om 18:01 schreef Hans:
> Hi all,
>
> discovered something. It looks like the keys are still not synced to the
> mirrors.
>
> I changed from ftp.de.debian.org to deb.debian.org, and all is working like a
> charm.
>
> So, I suppose, this issue might be solved.
>
> But it would be nice to add a package with the actual keys into the repo. The
> keys in the package "debian-archive-keyring" are too old (2012.1.1).

They're not. They're 2021.1.1.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#238760 — Re: [SOLVED] Re: Issues with Bullseye

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 18:15:36 CEST schrieb Frank:
Yes, this was a typo, sorry for that.

Best

Hans 
> Op 15-08-2021 om 18:01 schreef Hans:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > discovered something. It looks like the keys are still not synced to the
> > mirrors.
> > 
> > I changed from ftp.de.debian.org to deb.debian.org, and all is working
> > like a charm.
> > 
> > So, I suppose, this issue might be solved.
> > 
> > But it would be nice to add a package with the actual keys into the repo.
> > The keys in the package "debian-archive-keyring" are too old (2012.1.1).
> They're not. They're 2021.1.1.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web