From: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 23:37:14 +0800
To: tcmay@got.net
Subject: Re: Remailers not heard from; info?
Message-ID: <01I23RKTOST2AKTTTI@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


From:	IN%"tcmay@got.net" 20-FEB-1996 09:24:11.00

>(There are wrinkles that work, such as adding a subject line based on stuff
>stored inside the encrypted block a remailer opens for furhter processing.
>The nth remailer can add a suject line that may be different for every hop,
>or only added near or at the end of the remailings...)

	Adding a new subject line for each hop has the advantage that one can't
pick out messages to examine (for use in traffic analysis) simply because they
don't have subject lines. (I realize that lots of messages go through without
subject lines; one could, however, use such a filter as the initial thing to
look at before one checks whether a message appears to be something encrypted.
Steaography won't work to conceal such because of the multiple encryption,
unless the remailer combined decryption with steaography extraction and later
"packing". One problem with the latter solution, which does have its points,
would be the need for lots of different things with which to use steaography.
Otherwise, you could track remailers by that they kept sending out almost
exactly the same file over and over again; using the same one as was sent in
would be a variety of "barium-tagging". Hmm... you could have a setup that
added the message's steaographic concealment to the end of a "stack", and
picked up the new image/sound/whatever off of the start of the "stack." Could
be a bit expensive in disk space, though.
	-Allen