From: Andrew Lowenstern <andrew_loewenstern@il.us.swissbank.com>
To: Anthony Ortenzi <ortenzi@interactive.net>
Message Hash: 14dd07a313c4756e94d22498579960e22c9f75b96cece409ba03783f20c257b9
Message ID: <9502011924.AA02931@ch1d157nwk>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-01 19:28:22 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 1 Feb 95 11:28:22 PST
From: Andrew Lowenstern <andrew_loewenstern@il.us.swissbank.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 95 11:28:22 PST
To: Anthony Ortenzi <ortenzi@interactive.net>
Subject: Re: Fundamental Question?
Message-ID: <9502011924.AA02931@ch1d157nwk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
> Although I understand the need for remailers for anonymity, is it
> not true that the whole idea of encryption (good encryption, that
> is) is that no matter who gets the encrypted text, it really doesn't
> matter? Does this not mean that something like USENET is *perfect*
> for this?
Usenet may be provide good untracability for the recipient, but the if the
sender desires untracability she needs to use a remailer or some other
service to get the message into Usenet. Also, the recipient needs to know if
and where to look for the message. If the recipient isn't anticipating the
receipt of a message untracably, or doesn't care if 'they' know she is
receiving the message, then Usenet isn't necessary.
andrew
Return to February 1995
Return to “Andrew Lowenstern <andrew_loewenstern@il.us.swissbank.com>”
1995-02-01 (Wed, 1 Feb 95 11:28:22 PST) - Re: Fundamental Question? - Andrew Lowenstern <andrew_loewenstern@il.us.swissbank.com>