From: Wei Dai <weidai@eskimo.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 10:51:19 +0800
To: Lance Cottrell <loki@infonex.com>
Subject: Re: strengthening remailer protocols
In-Reply-To: <v03007817ae5963e47e23@[206.170.115.3]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95.960909120620.4743A-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sun, 8 Sep 1996, Lance Cottrell wrote:

> Mixmaster prevents replay, so flooding multiple copies of a single message
> will not work. This is the reason Mixmaster has no reply block feature. I
> can see two ways in which replies can work safely.

How about a combination of the two?  Suppose Alice wants to anonymously
post a message and get replies.  She generates a new RSA key, signs her
post with it, and asks readers to send encrypted replies to a server. 
Then periodicly she sends a one-time reply block to the server to retrieve
the accumulated replies. 

This would let Alice receive an unbounded number of replies and also give
some protection against the denial-of-service and rubber-hose attacks
Lance described.

Wei Dai