1994-12-01 - WHAT THE.. (was: Manditory key sig..

Header Data

From: Syed Yusuf <yusuf921@uidaho.edu>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 4e61ae9bb8003355ebc0e8f301eb7126803112234df4ee26547eda881f83c12f
Message ID: <Pine.3.87.9412010920.A18255-0100000@goshawk.csrv.uidaho.edu>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-12-01 18:03:43 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 1 Dec 94 10:03:43 PST

Raw message

From: Syed Yusuf <yusuf921@uidaho.edu>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 94 10:03:43 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: WHAT THE.. (was: Manditory key sig..
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9412010920.A18255-0100000@goshawk.csrv.uidaho.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



in all this discussion about how well it would work and ways around it,
I think I've missed the problem that people are trying to solve.

isn't it ironic that privacy advocates are suggesting manditory
loss of anonimity (which is what forced signing is).

Thread

• Return to December 1994

• Return to “eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)”

• Return to “Syed Yusuf <yusuf921@uidaho.edu>”

• 1994-12-01 (Thu, 1 Dec 94 10:03:43 PST) - WHAT THE.. (was: Manditory key sig.. - Syed Yusuf <yusuf921@uidaho.edu>
  • 1994-12-01 (Thu, 1 Dec 94 12:08:20 PST) - Re: WHAT THE.. (was: Manditory key sig.. - eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)