1993-11-05 - Re: ANON: mail concerns

Header Data

From: “Christian D. Odhner” <cdodhner@indirect.com>
To: na26436@anon.penet.fi
Message Hash: 4a6c5c4ce2afab13b000d6ab72db2e8feaab5e368b01761738a999634e06ccf6
Message ID: <Pine.3.07.9311041952.A26707-b100000@indirect.com>
Reply To: <9311040252.AA20137@alumni.cco.caltech.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1993-11-05 02:17:50 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 4 Nov 93 18:17:50 PST

Raw message

From: "Christian D. Odhner" <cdodhner@indirect.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 93 18:17:50 PST
To: na26436@anon.penet.fi
Subject: Re: ANON: mail concerns
In-Reply-To: <9311040252.AA20137@alumni.cco.caltech.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9311041952.A26707-b100000@indirect.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Wed, 3 Nov 1993 nobody@alumni.cco.caltech.edu wrote:

> >::
> >Request-Encryption-To: X
> >
> >If user ID X is on the remailer's pubkey ring, the outgoing message is
> >encrypted to X. This could be usefull for anonymous return-address blocks.
> Encryption should be the default. Err on the side of caution.
What if the "To" address has more than one key associated with it? Maybe
even more than one entity? Another (not publicized) remailer?

Maybe this wouldn't be a problem. Hmmm.....

Happy Hunting, -Chris

Christian Douglas Odhner     | "The NSA can have my secret key when they pry
cdodhner@indirect.com	     | it from my cold, dead, hands... But they shall
pgp 2.3 public key by finger | NEVER have the password it's encrypted with!"
My opinions are shareware. To register your copy, send me 15$ in DigiCash.
  Key fingerprint =  58 62 A2 84 FD 4F 56 38  82 69 6F 08 E4 F1 79 11 

> Version: 2.3
> iQCVAgUBLNgXzIjvfLxJbYYtAQEK4AP9HrSaMSOnlsxzEjgLbAgvsCSw3vMxLJ4u
> 856ZbKI2cZTNLoPzyWLNW68gZ7kcNeaF7MHKzWbI9tLEDePpWN34sB11wBlpfzcf
> WzcYVLI6JBLVERq2seyKU3cqAhWuxldSDeAlsKkMsrzI0tGgOaLkxCxhxn9weZf8
> 58mZeANd3sg=
> =8F9u