From: Mutant Rob <wlkngowl@unix.asb.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 22:59:31 +0800
To: Charles Gimon <gimonca@skypoint.com>
Subject: Re: Minneapolis Star Tribune this morning
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960321113224.9485A-100000@mirage>
Message-ID: <3151F296.1331@unix.asb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Charles Gimon wrote:
> Mpls. Strib did a piece this morning, front page, about AltaVista,
> Dejanews, etc. Well-worn territory to readers of this list. Your
> words can come back to haunt you, all that stuff. One paragraph that
> deserves rebuttal from those of you who are better-informed:
> 
> "Of course, technology is working on solutions to itself, but
>    mechanisms that would hide the name of a message's author, such as
>    cryptography and anonymous remailers, are convoluted and incomplete."

Rebuttal? Why?  Remailers generally are.  There aren't enough penet.fi 
type remailers, which people prefer not only because there is a mapping 
but because it's easier to use.  (It's also a bit more secure if there
are c2-nym remailers mapped to penet.fi type remailers in various
countries).

Not everyone is on a system that is PGP-friendly.  Handling PGP-messages
from commercial services or even most mailer apps is awkward at best,
and the commands for mixmaster/c'punk remailers are not as standard as
they could be.  (A PGP3 DLL would improve the use of crypto and anon-
remailers quite a bit.)

>From the excerpt you posted, it doesn't seem as if they were criticizing
remailers... which is a pretty good thing.

> 
> Author was Jonathan Gaw; no e-mail address given. Star Tribune Online
> is at http://www.startribune.com