1997-09-28 - Re: Remailer Attack (fwd)
Header Data
From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 1797da1b0f0d351c71469df49f7fd8d9f3cf6c3d72fe50837b35908780dca402
Message ID: <199709272343.BAA13628@basement.replay.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-09-28 00:03:30 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 08:03:30 +0800
Raw message
From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 08:03:30 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Remailer Attack (fwd)
Message-ID: <199709272343.BAA13628@basement.replay.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
See also the CDA. Yes, parts are still in effect, including provisions giving
immunity to interactive services if material was provided by someone
else. Conceivably this could apply to remailers, if they could call themselves
interactive services. Certainly the material they send was not provided by
them.
Thread
Return to September 1997
Return to “nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)”
1997-09-28 (Sun, 28 Sep 1997 08:03:30 +0800) - Re: Remailer Attack (fwd) - nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)