1996-10-24 - Re: Netescrow & Remailers?

Header Data

From: Steve Reid <steve@edmweb.com>
To: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
Message Hash: c72d204cb76eb57fab3138f5e9eade4028d944c180eb8b0c7521a3fe078dc631
Message ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.961023205431.760A-100000@bitbucket.edmweb.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-10-24 04:17:47 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 21:17:47 -0700 (PDT)

Raw message

From: Steve Reid <steve@edmweb.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 21:17:47 -0700 (PDT)
To: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
Subject: Re: Netescrow & Remailers?
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.961023205431.760A-100000@bitbucket.edmweb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>        Would it make remailers more reliable to use a netescrow
>system, so that if a remailer goes offline, the others can request its
>keys, and continue moving its messages?

Do you operate a malicious remailer? Have you just recieved a message from
a person, encrypted for another remailer? Want to know who this person is
communicating with? Bomb the next remailer in the chain or do whatever
else to force it to reveal it's keys. Once that's done, you can peel away
that layer of encryption and then go to work on bombing the next remailer
in the chain to obtain it's keys. Repeat until you've peeled off all the
layers of remailer encryption and can see the final destination address. 

Tell us, what have you done with the _real_ Adam Shostack? ;P





Thread