From: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 11:34:07 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Anonymnity at teleport
Message-ID: <01I3T84SPUOW8Y4Y84@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


	A bit of interesting information about teleport. Still not as good
as c2 (as I stated), but it's still good to have multiple anonymous account
providers around... whether or not they mean to be anonymous. This is from a
sysadmin type there (why I deleted the name) who I'll ask about the Majordomo
patch.
	-Allen

>>Our users can have a P.O. Box as their address (or a false address),
>>whatever they want as their 'real name', and can pay for their accounts by
>>mailing in cash. All they need to do is be close to a phone that isn't
>>theirs for an hour or so.
>
>>The can put in a phone# when they set up, then call in from that phone (even
>>if it isn't their own) and have one of us call them back with a few
>>minutes...all set.
>
>>Can't get any more anonymous than that.
>
>>Of course it *is* against the rules.
>
>	The reason that I'd take your name off, yes. Also a reason not to be as
>trusting... since it is against the rules at teleport, you're more likely to
>cooperate than Sameer is if the feds or someone want to know who the anonymous
>person is. Sameer makes quite sure he doesn't _have_ any information to give
>such types.... including log files of telnet sessions.

True, but a log file without a name, address, phone# or SS# to attach to it
is worth *very* little.... :)