1995-02-06 - Re: Cooperation
Header Data
From: Thomas Grant Edwards <tedwards@src.umd.edu>
To: “Timothy C. May” <tcmay@netcom.com>
Message Hash: c6fe567f295f12d774d5bdf4bb4a8209ca6ec90a2ac1b9df0f4691615286368a
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950206131048.20818B-100000@thrash.src.umd.edu>
Reply To: <199502061154.DAA11069@netcom15.netcom.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-06 18:14:00 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 10:14:00 PST
Raw message
From: Thomas Grant Edwards <tedwards@src.umd.edu>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 10:14:00 PST
To: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Cooperation
In-Reply-To: <199502061154.DAA11069@netcom15.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950206131048.20818B-100000@thrash.src.umd.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
On Mon, 6 Feb 1995, Timothy C. May wrote:
> Yes! Standards are not collusion. In fact, standards can lessen the
> amount of ad hoc contact needed between remailer operators, and thus
> reduce somewhat the prospects for compromise and collusion.
If someone adds the secure coin-flip exchange between chain neighbors to
my Dining Cryptographers IRC client, all remailer operators can go on IRC
and anonymously discuss the standards so that no cabals can form ;)
-Thomas
Thread
Return to February 1995
- Return to “Nathan Zook <nzook@bga.com>”
- Return to “tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)”
Return to “Thomas Grant Edwards <tedwards@src.umd.edu>”
- 1995-02-06 (Mon, 6 Feb 95 03:31:24 PST) - Cooperation - Nathan Zook <nzook@bga.com>
- 1995-02-06 (Mon, 6 Feb 95 03:55:41 PST) - Re: Cooperation - tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
- 1995-02-06 (Mon, 6 Feb 95 10:14:00 PST) - Re: Cooperation - Thomas Grant Edwards <tedwards@src.umd.edu>
- 1995-02-06 (Mon, 6 Feb 95 03:55:41 PST) - Re: Cooperation - tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)