From: Nesta Stubbs <root@nesta.pr.mcs.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 95 00:02:25 PST
To: Cypherpunks <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: Re: Data Havens..A consumer perspective
In-Reply-To: <199501121637.IAA00893@largo.remailer.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9501130154.B28998-0100000@nesta.pr.mcs.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Thu, 12 Jan 1995, Eric Hughes wrote:

>    why would you give the haven owner free run?  I mean naturally he does 
>    have free run with your data once he gets it, 
> 
> That's exactly the reason, namely, to make the agreement between
> individuals match the underlying nature of information.  This is
> different in the trust in silence about the user.  This is also not to
> say that the operator can't undertake to make assurances about where
> bits go and don't go.
>
are you saying that there is an agreement between the data haven operator 
and the user?  If so, that's one of the things i was attmeting to point 
out in that reply.  I think the agreement, wether it is a contract, not 
likely, or a sense of trust is extremely important to the data-haven.
 
>    I am sure you 
>    woudln't want your data stored ona  public access Unix system, or in 
>    plaintext.
> 
> So don't store it in plaintext.  The operator of the data storage
> facility has no responsibility for this.
> 
Right now were are getting into so many fraggin different definitions of 
data haven, that this conversation is loopng over itself infinetly.  In 
one sort of data Haven, the operator does have a responsibility to keep 
the data private, yet on another, he doesn't have th responsibility, it 
all depends on what the aims and views and golas of the DataHaven are.  
And since we have not yet agreed on what a data Haven.....we get usenet 
run-around.  

>    if the datahaven is turned into a data broker
> 
> I don't know about you, but I don't like paying money for random bits.
> 
this is ties into the above line, maybe you arent just sending encrypted 
data, maybe your selling secrets to a datahaven operator, who is 
offshore, or who has the money ot pay you know, and also the structre set up 
to recieve, transmit, and take payment and pay for that secret data, or 
valuable info.  Once again I think that we are working with multiple 
definitions of DataHaven here, adn it is leading to confusions.

>    well what would be thepurpose of this data haven you propose except as a 
>    extra storage pace for data, like if you dont have space on your own 
>    drive?
> 
> Even when you've got enough of your own disk space, it's still subject
> to failure.  Putting data in multiple places reduces the possibility
> of unrecoverable catastrophe.
> 
ther are already services much better equipped to deal with this problem, 
although, I am unsure if any of them are crypto-aware as of yet.  Osmthig 
to look into.