From: Matthew J Ghio <mg5n+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 94 14:00:53 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Insecurity of anonymous remailers
In-Reply-To: <9402081913.AA00297@deathstar.iaks.ira.uka.de>
Message-ID: <MhK0fr600awIJHyEVt@andrew.cmu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


danisch@ira.uka.de (Hadmut Danisch) wrote:

> Matthew J Ghio wrote:
> 
> > I am pleased to report on the performance of our two newest remailers,
> > qwerty@netcom.com and nate@vis.colostate.edu.  Both remailers had
> > a very good response time.
> 
> Is it really a good idea to make anonymous remailers work so fast?
> Everyone who can analyze the traffic of anonymous remailers and
> can read the from/to header lines, the message size and the
> transfer dates immediately knows who sent mail to whom. 

True.  I think it depends on what your intended purpose is for using a
remailer.  If you just want to post an anonymous message, faster would
be better for sake of keeping with the conversation.  If you really want
to communicate securely, you can use remailers such as
elee9sf@menudo.uh.edu which batches messages out at midnite and adds
random padding, or remail@extropia.wimsey.com which offers encryption
and adds a random delay.