1993-04-14 - FWEE! Re: alt.whistleblowers

Header Data

From: wcs@anchor.ho.att.com
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: bd659b9acb2cdc25d446fecb9217a070d8c887b4401e942a6501e084c825b42c
Message ID: <9304141746.AA27675@anchor.ho.att.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-04-14 17:46:44 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 14 Apr 93 10:46:44 PDT

Raw message

From: wcs@anchor.ho.att.com
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 93 10:46:44 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: FWEE!  Re: alt.whistleblowers
Message-ID: <9304141746.AA27675@anchor.ho.att.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


> Kick it around on alt.config
>> Just do it ....
The problem is that alt.whistleblowers is technically more complex
than just creating an alt.group and having one anon.poster site -
we need to resolve issues of secure mail standards (e.g. should
the system use RIPEM or just PGP, are there any non-US sites with RIPEM
so that non-US anon.poster sites can use it, should there be multiple
anon.sites and should they do remailing between them, etc.)
Otherwise we may end up with a single point of failure,
and if it's any good, it will at least get its mail watched,
if it doesn't get raided - traffic analysis is important here.

Are we only going to use anon.posting sites, or are forged postings
also going to be an acceptable technique?  Do we at least need 
to publish a guide to forging mail headers so your mail to the
anon.poster can appear to come from kremvax or whitehouse.com?

Let's try to get a good idea of what we want to do before dropping
it into alt.config.

			Bill Stewart

--
This isn't the 8th Dimension, we're somewhere over New Jersey




Thread