1996-05-23 - Re: An alternative to remailer shutdowns

Header Data

From: “Rev. Mark Grant, ULC” <mark@unicorn.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 3334b4cfd826bfa3889bfefff92899781672d17407b18396134ddd642cd3c53c
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9605231908.A187-0100000@unicorn.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-05-23 23:53:28 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 07:53:28 +0800

Raw message

From: "Rev. Mark Grant, ULC" <mark@unicorn.com>
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 07:53:28 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: An alternative to remailer shutdowns
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9605231908.A187-0100000@unicorn.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Wed, 22 May 1996, Bill Stewart wrote:

> A secondary concern is handling multi-casts - should the remailer
> create one copy for each recipient (secure, easy, space-wasteful),
> or should it try to get fancy and keep the message for N recipients or D days?

Easy on Unix - just create N links to the same file, delete each link as
the recipient requests it, and delete all remaining links after D days. 

	Mark






Thread