1995-08-19 - Re: Certificates/Anonymity/Policy/True Names

Header Data

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

Raw message

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?





Thread