From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>
Date: Sat, 11 May 1996 08:09:55 +0800
To: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Subject: Re: Transitive trust and MLM
In-Reply-To: <01I4IHRSE6Q88Y5BAX@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.93.960509165130.25395E-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Thu, 9 May 1996, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote:

> From:	IN%"llurch@networking.stanford.edu"  "Rich Graves"  8-MAY-1996
> 04:33:21.44 
> 
> >The fact that you're sending postcards is only a problem if you don't want
> >them to be read. It's more the email I receive that I worry about, so all 
> >my friends use the address rich@alpha.c2.org now.
> 
> 	How would this help? Whoever's wanting to monitor you will just
> monitor rich@alpha.c2.org's incoming mail.

To do that they would need to crack one or more of the accounts with
access to the alpha server, which would probably leave evidence, or run a
packet sniffer nearby. Ironically, I am more confident of the security of
alpha.c2.org than I am of my own machine. The threat profile is people who
have forwarded mail with envelope and Received: headers indicating that
the source is my mail spool to a mailing list. Twice. I know that I'm
surrounded by insecure, non-firewalled UNIX boxes that could be running
packet sniffers, and that is something I cannot fix unless I want to trade
gloriously fast and reliable Ethernet connectivity for a modem. My
correspondents do not have PGP and are not likely to get it. So, a public
alpha nym helps in this (perhaps unique) case.

rich@alpha.c2.org also works as a permanent address (knock on wood).

-rich