From: anonymous@extropia.wimsey.com
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 69a9214ae261a917f7ebfaebb8756585fb9f2e3eef2ca117a830c1c540408117
Message ID: <199402040132.AA19447@xtropia>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-02-04 01:49:44 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 3 Feb 94 17:49:44 PST
From: anonymous@extropia.wimsey.com
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 94 17:49:44 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Remailer Tearline Conventions
Message-ID: <199402040132.AA19447@xtropia>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
* Reply to msg originally in CYPHERPUNKS
Uu> From: edgar@spectrx.saigon.com (Edgar W. Swank)
Uu> Someone (not me) asked about remailer tearline conventions to
Uu> eliminate automatic sigs:
Uu> I'm the one who brought this up "months ago" and the short answer to
Uu> your question is "no."
Uu> Hall Remailer <nowhere@bsu-cs.bsu.edu>
Uu> added a "cut line" of
Uu> --ignore--
Uu> At the time I brought this up, the attitude of most remailer operators
Uu> (Chael Hall and Miron Cuperman notably excepted) was that anyone who
Uu> couldn't figure out how and remember to turn off their auto sig didn't
Uu> deserve any privacy.
An astonishing bit of Internet provincial fuckheadedness, I must say!
When one considers that there are _many_ other nets that gate into
Internet these days and innumerable store-and-forward host systems whose
message handling processes are _completely_ beyond the control of the
end user (even smug Cypherpunk geniuses), this attitude mystifies me.
Uu> I recommend that you always use the wimsey (extropia) remailer as the
Uu> first (or only) leg of a remailer chain. It is also the only
Uu> Cypherpunks remailer outside the USA (it's in Canada) which will make
Uu> tracing msgs a little more difficult for USA authorities.
That remail@extropia.wimsey.com is in Canada specifically makes
communications with it fair game for NSA interception, however.
Return to February 1994
Return to “Kirk Sheppard <kshep@netcom.com>”