1993-01-21 - Re: Communications Policy

Header Data

From: Johan Helsingius <julf@penet.FI>
To: “Timothy C. May” <tcmay@netcom.com>
Message Hash: 461f29333949e4ec95ee37effd0910121df8e22b679360419dfae31645cf775f
Message ID: <9301220100.aa01285@penet.penet.FI>
Reply To: <9301211716.AA27162@netcom3.netcom.com>
UTC Datetime: 1993-01-21 23:48:46 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:48:46 PST

Raw message

From: Johan Helsingius <julf@penet.FI>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:48:46 PST
To: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Communications Policy
In-Reply-To: <9301211716.AA27162@netcom3.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <9301220100.aa01285@penet.penet.FI>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Tim May writes:

> This was well-debated about a month or so back.

Ooops. Sorry. Must have been just before I joined the list. Always
putting my foot in the wrong place...

> In a note I wrote back then, which did not name the particular site
> involved, I reported that after sending a piece of "anonymous" mail, I
> got a letter of "support" for my position from the remailer operator!

Urgh!

> After I mentioned this to the Cypherpunks list, it came out that other
> sites were also keeping various forms of archives (for some or all of
> the reasons listed above).

Double urgh!

> Anyway, such human-operated remailers, running on UNIX boxes in
> unsecure conditions, have many nonideal characteristics.

Agree.

	Julf






Thread