| Secure Internet Mix Name | Mix Type | inquiries | declined | carried out |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SecureInternet(1) | Premium Exit | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| SecureInternet2 | Test Mix for JonDos | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| SecureInternet3 | Premium Exit | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| SecureInternet4 | Premium Exit | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| SecureInternet5 | Free Exit | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| SecureInternet6 | Free Exit | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| SecureInternet7 | Premium Exit | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| SecureInternet8 | Premium Middle | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| TOTAL | 0 | 0 | 0 |
To provide precise information on the preconditions of successful lawful interception measures on JonDonym cascades:
- We must get forced by the authorities of Switzerland and/or the mix locations statey
- Without legal enforcement we never will enable interception as it then wasn't lawful (inquiries would get declined by us)
- ALL of the other mix operators in the mix cascade in question TOO must get forced by the authorities in their state
(if only two of three mix operators carry out a lawful interception measure, no successful interception is possible).
To summarize the report:
- We were never asked by any party from any state to carry out any interception meassure
- Therefor, there was no need to decline any inquiry
- Therefor, no interception measure was ever carried out
Also, we have never heard of any interception inquiry from our Mix Cascade partners:
- Lexi Pimenidis IT Consulting, Germany
- Martin Behrens Germany
- Delta-Protect Ltd., Great Britain
