From: Michael Handler <grendel@netaxs.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 18:11:01 PST
To: Cypherpeople <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: Reordering, not Latency (Was: Re: Remailer)
In-Reply-To: <199501252158.NAA12786@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950125210658.29117A-100000@unix2.netaxs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Wed, 25 Jan 1995 Louis Cypher wrote:

> In recent discussions, the consensus 
> was that message reordering was superior to (and the actual intent of) 
> latency.  Reordering is not sufficient, a form of latency is required 
> to make it effective.

	I have literally hundreds of messages archived from the CP list of
several months back where Eric Hughes repeatedly states that reordering,
not latency, is the key. Reordering of a sufficient magnitude will
introduce latency inherently. Otherwise you are still vulnerable to 
traffic analysis (which is an art, not a science, remember).

--
Michael Handler                                         <grendel@netaxs.com>
Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics                   Philadelphia, PA
"Toi qui fais au proscrit ce regard calme et haut" -- Baudelaire * Skotoseme
PGP Key ID FC031321  Print: 9B DB 9A B0 1B 0D 56 DA  61 6A 57 AD B2 4C 7B AF