1996-10-23 - Netescrow & Remailers?

Header Data

From: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
Message Hash: 270fcc892084ee94d07a8fd8e916e82ff826f0a3244193092d3ab3fc8929ac43
Message ID: <199610231554.KAA02772@homeport.org>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-10-23 14:48:20 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 07:48:20 -0700 (PDT)

Raw message

From: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 07:48:20 -0700 (PDT)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
Subject: Netescrow & Remailers?
Message-ID: <199610231554.KAA02772@homeport.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


	Would it make remailers more reliable to use a netescrow
system, so that if a remailer goes offline, the others can request its
keys, and continue moving its messages?

	To me, reliability is as large a problem as UI.  If the next
Mixmaster is going to do direct IP transport, reliability could
increase as a problem.

Adam



-- 
"Every year the Republicans campaign like Libertarians, and then go to
Wasthington and spend like Democrats."

Vote Harry Browne for President.  http://www.harrybrowne96.org

Thread

• Return to October 1996

• Return to “Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>”
• Return to “Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>”
• Return to “Matt Blaze <mab@research.att.com>”

• Return to ““Timothy C. May” <tcmay@got.net>”

• 1996-10-23 (Wed, 23 Oct 1996 07:48:20 -0700 (PDT)) - Netescrow & Remailers? - Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
  • 1996-10-23 (Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:53:34 -0700 (PDT)) - Re: Netescrow & Remailers? - “Timothy C. May” <tcmay@got.net>
    • 1996-10-24 (Wed, 23 Oct 1996 17:11:41 -0700 (PDT)) - Re: Netescrow & Remailers? - Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
      • 1996-10-24 (Wed, 23 Oct 1996 22:03:16 -0700 (PDT)) - Re: Netescrow & Remailers? - Matt Blaze <mab@research.att.com>
    • 1996-10-25 (Fri, 25 Oct 1996 12:01:53 -0700 (PDT)) - Re: Netescrow & Remailers? - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>