From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 23:31:24 -0800 (PST)
To: "Igor Chudov @ home" <ichudov@algebra.com>
Subject: Re: kickouts done the Cypherpunks way...
In-Reply-To: <199611250134.TAA23699@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.94.961125022016.5157I-100000@polaris>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sun, 24 Nov 1996, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:

> The question is, is there a strategy of making variations and detecting
> them in quotes to finally catch Mr. Y?

It's not a new concept if thats what you mean.  Has many names.  "Canary
trapping, imposed distribution attributation" and others.

Generally either a single non-spelling error is introduced (generally with
punctuation), or several errors are introduced in different patterns
throughout the document.  Word order is another common variation to use.  
At the most basic level, a script could easily introduce e.g., a
semicolon in place of a comma once in a document, and in a different
place for each document. The "phantom serial number" of a given document
is obtained by counting the commas encountered before a semicolon is
found.  

If a correlation between serial number and original recipiant is
maintained, the first tier of the avenue by which the document is escaping
is easily identified.

Of course this method assumes that the documents are distributed onward
without alteration or summarizing.

More complicated variations can be introduced as is needed.
(Paragraph/subject order, names of participants, etc.)

Coderpunks might have a harder time.  For obvious reasons technical
writings are much more sensitive to even minor alterations.

> 	- Igor.
> 

--
Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures
Finger for Public Key   Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern
Vote Monarchist         Switzerland