1994-08-06 - Latency vs. Reordering (Was: Remailer ideas (Was: Re: Latency vs. Reordering))

Header Data

From: hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: ea71bc3d8d677866187e4840f7616fa94d6a8b381492185e982b9a9dc21bde88
Message ID: <9408051716.AA14773@ah.com>
Reply To: <3778@aiki.demon.co.uk>
UTC Datetime: 1994-08-06 03:36:16 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 5 Aug 94 20:36:16 PDT

Raw message

From: hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 94 20:36:16 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Latency vs. Reordering (Was: Remailer ideas (Was: Re: Latency vs. Reordering))
In-Reply-To: <3778@aiki.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <9408051716.AA14773@ah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Back to the start, I guess.

>   Specifically cryptographic elements are easily added to the system
>       *	packets can be delayed for random intervals

Let me repeat:

REORDERING IS OF PRIMARY IMPORTANCE FOR REMAILER SECURITY.

ADDING LATENCY IS NOT.

And I don't want to hear any excuses that you can say latency and mean
reordering, because that's self-delusion.  Not only is it false, but
misleading.  Reordering is necessary for security, and latency is a
by-product.  You don't get security by adding by-products.

Eric





Thread