From: “Philippe Nave” <pdn@dwroll.dw.att.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 352bbbf09d61fc3e7eee272f5831ba81d1b4391d7dc9cc17d6168e34acb7a083
Message ID: <9311092231.AA21883@toad.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-11-09 22:33:15 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 14:33:15 PST
From: "Philippe Nave" <pdn@dwroll.dw.att.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 14:33:15 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Usenet: 'Resistance Is Futile'
Message-ID: <9311092231.AA21883@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Regarding the recent question of whether the cypherpunks list is being
gatewayed to Usenet:
1) So what? I have always assumed that anything distributed to a group
of _any_ kind may wind up scattered all over the globe and may turn
up in unusual places. If the data is sensitive, encrypt it!
2) [Disclaimer: I know just enough Unix to get in trouble..] From what
I understand so far, all it takes is one cypherpunk and some magic
mail routing code to bounce cypherpunks list postings anywhere else
on the planet. If this cypherpunk bounced the traffic off an anonymous
remailer, you would never even be able to tell who was feeding the
other system. Unless I'm missing something, there seems to be no
defense possible against this activity.
3) I agree with the concern expressed by Tim May that we may be opened
up to 'disruptive flaming and puerile argumentation.' The only way
to avoid this problem [as far as I can tell] is to limit postings
to members of the mailing list. That's a tough one. Let us hope that
our coffee shop is not overrun by screaming children...
........................................................................
Philippe D. Nave, Jr. | The person who does not use message encryption
pdn@dwroll.dw.att.com | will soon be at the mercy of those who DO...
Denver, Colorado USA | PGP public key: by arrangement.
Return to November 1993
Return to “Tony A Rippy <tr2n+@andrew.cmu.edu>”