1994-07-27 - (None)

Header Data

From: hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 3de7382d4632f63a8ec4807536ee5aba2ad20f3e7e8d6ea20b3aa9b66ea70c41
Message ID: <9407270155.AA06683@ah.com>
Reply To: <940726191522R6Qjgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us>
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-27 02:17:27 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 26 Jul 94 19:17:27 PDT

Raw message

From: hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 94 19:17:27 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: (None)
In-Reply-To: <940726191522R6Qjgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us>
Message-ID: <9407270155.AA06683@ah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


	Unless the messages are given a delivery latency of <insert random
   time>, Traffic Analysis will allow for the tracking of messages. 

For the Nth time, it's not latency, it's reordering which is important.

If you have a large enough message flow, adding latency gives you
sufficient reordering.  If your message flow is small, latency doesn't
sufficiently reorder.  Large and small here are message interval times
relative to added latency times.

Random reordering induces random added latencies.  The converse does
not always hold.

Eric





Thread