1996-09-05 - Voluntary Disclosure of True Names

Header Data

From: tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 9cee5ddfa7934159c4fe8bcbc4b8438907d2b67c059b11496a228af205249ffd
Message ID: <ae53a8ec0c021004c604@[207.167.93.63]>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-09-05 07:12:11 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 15:12:11 +0800

Raw message

From: tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 15:12:11 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Voluntary Disclosure of True Names
Message-ID: <ae53a8ec0c021004c604@[207.167.93.63]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


In a rare moment of lucidity Vladimir Z. Dettweiler wrote:

>I think cpunks should hold the view that communication is a matter
>of mutual consent between sender and receiver. if a receiver says,
>"I don't want any anonymous messages", then should be able to block them.

But this is precisely what nearly all of us have been arguing. Namely, that
the issue of anonymity vs. providing of True Names, is a matter of
_contract_ between parties, not something the government is justified in
sticking its nose into.

Those who wish to not deal with the entities they cannot reliably verify
the True Name of are free to filter them out.

All we are asking is that those of us happy to deal with S. Boxx, Black
Unicorn, PrOduct Cypher, Pablo Escobar, and other pseudospoofing tentacles,
not be told by a government that, for our own good, such communications are
felonies.


>the above is almost exactly what Dyson was saying, and I have been

No, Dyson said "Therefore I would favor allowing anonymity -- with some
form of traceability only under terms considerably stronger than what are
generally required for a wiretap."

This implies a role for government, and concomitant restrictions on related
anonymity technologies, to provide traceability. So much for mutual
agreement between sender and recipient.

(I have nothing against senders and recipients agreeing to use the services
of some third party in providing ultimate traceability. I'm not wild about
the U.S. Government being this third party, paid for by tax money, but so
long as it is not required, it's a minor concern to me. I surmise, though,
that use of the U.S. Government as a third party would not be optional, in
the schemes of Dyson, Denning, and others of that ilk.)

--Tim May

We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









Thread