From: Jim McCoy <mccoy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu>
To: poier@sfu.ca (Skye Merlin Poier)
Message Hash: 94adea320cc64eec42251f73e41728fbcbd753e8e8aa5808602c9a67c7cfcf6f
Message ID: <199305312329.AA10472@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu>
Reply To: <9305312244.AA20903@malibu.sfu.ca>
UTC Datetime: 1993-05-31 22:51:53 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 31 May 93 15:51:53 PDT
From: Jim McCoy <mccoy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu>
Date: Mon, 31 May 93 15:51:53 PDT
To: poier@sfu.ca (Skye Merlin Poier)
Subject: Re: Crypto anarchy in a VW? (not the bug)
In-Reply-To: <9305312244.AA20903@malibu.sfu.ca>
Message-ID: <199305312329.AA10472@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text
Skye Merlin Poier writes:
[...]
> Also, a while back someone mentioned in passing buried cables.. this
> stirred up an old idea I had about server anonimity, that is that the
> actual physical location of a server would be very difficult to pin
> down... the only way to do this with any real degree of security would be
> to bounce signals off a satellite but this would be rather costly...
Try this idea out: several machines agree to "host" a server. Each machine
runs a virtual-server process that communicates with the other
virtual-server programs. These programs then combine to run the actual
server (a sort of shared virtual multi-processor). The server itself _has
no physical existence_ and could operate as long as only one of the hosts
is able to spare it some CPU and memory slices. The "server" would
basically consist of it's instruction packets being bounced around the net.
Secure crypto communication between the "processors" with some reflectors
scattered around the net to provide easy access points for those wanting to
use the services and you have a service that doesn;t really exist, at least
not as far as current legal definitions go... :)
jim
Return to June 1993
Return to “RYAN Alan Porter <ryan@rtfm.mlb.fl.us>”