From: Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>
To: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: d351c744b505879abe00bd1f3f56cad56472a4fec7e764e061661386e994b976
Message ID: <9508191818.AA22531@sulphur.osf.org>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-08-19 18:18:36 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 19 Aug 95 11:18:36 PDT
From: Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 95 11:18:36 PDT
To: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Certificates/Anonymity/Policy/True Names
Message-ID: <9508191818.AA22531@sulphur.osf.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
I think there are many people who might be willing to use an
"anon CA" should it exist:
Whistleblowers, perhaps Deep Throat would have used email
People writing letters to the editor who don't want to trust
the editor to withhold their info
People who desire anonymyity yet don't want to trust the gov't
to certify their communications as authentic/forged
(Unabomber, Om Shin-rkyo)
Any number of writers who have used psuedonyms and now want to
get paid in ecash; Mark Twain?
Return to August 1995
Return to “Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>”