1995-10-24 - Re: Anonymity: A Modest Proposal

Header Data

From: tien@well.sf.ca.us (Lee Tien)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: cc8a2c74c76a22051bfa94c2bc2e58bb0990a49e2271e350b807d6b4bb4edbc2
Message ID: <199510240148.SAA26014@well.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-10-24 01:49:20 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 23 Oct 95 18:49:20 PDT

Raw message

From: tien@well.sf.ca.us (Lee Tien)
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 95 18:49:20 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Anonymity: A Modest Proposal
Message-ID: <199510240148.SAA26014@well.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


s1018954@aix2.uottawa.ca wrote:

>On Wed, 18 Oct 1995, t byfield wrote:
>
>> At 9:42 AM 10/18/95, Hal wrote:
>> 
>>         Of course. The problem is that protocols as implemented permit
>> header-forging: it's a practical fact of the net, and one that maybe
>> shouldn't be overlooked on (basically vague) 'moral' grounds, any more than
>
>The courts can't overlook it either. There goes liability. If I posted 
>pirated software from this account, according to what you're saying, I could 
>claim a forgery and show reasonable doubt.

How difficult is it to forge headers?  How difficult is it to trace a
message to the actual sender if the header is forged?  Is there a way to
quantify traceability on a simple scale, for rough purposes?

Lee

Lee Tien
Attorney
tien@well.sf.ca.us
(510) 525-0817 voice
(510) 525-3015 fax







Thread