From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 19848ba63c6bee4d49b19fa5bbb2c2a0947b0653314d24999e4c801ce8e4cd54
Message ID: <199407282246.PAA04279@netcom13.netcom.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-28 22:46:38 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 28 Jul 94 15:46:38 PDT
From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 94 15:46:38 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Signature Stripping a Bad Idea
Message-ID: <199407282246.PAA04279@netcom13.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Reasons why attempts to automatically strip signatures a bad idea:
* Breaks the assumpton that remailers are not reaching in and
twiddling internals of a message.
* Maybe a signature is _desired_ at some point.
* Can lead to various problems, especially if implemented badly.
We've had this debate before, and the consensus was that treating a
remailed block as inviolate is a "win."
Certainly anyone can announce this "feature" as a service, sort of a
"Dummie's Remailer." Like censor services (that screen your mail),
such things are easily imaginable, but should never become the norm,
and should never be mandated.
--Tim May
--
..........................................................................
Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments.
Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available.
"National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."
Return to July 1994
Return to “tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)”
1994-07-28 (Thu, 28 Jul 94 15:46:38 PDT) - Signature Stripping a Bad Idea - tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)