From: Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com>
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 22:57:46 +0800
To: cypherpunks@EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer)
Subject: Re: Too few cypherpunks nodes. (fwd)
Message-ID: <199705241406.JAA23220@einstein.ssz.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


Forwarded message:

> Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 14:10:59 +0100
> From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
> Subject: Re: Too few cypherpunks nodes.

> Does anyone know how many people are using Jim's cypherpunks@ssz.com?

I don't even check, less than 100 for shure and probably less than 25.
Don't remember seeing that many notices of subscription to the cpunks list.
There are a LOT of info and help requests though.

> Also I might point out that the afforded privacy is mostly illusionary
> because any TLA who cared could observe the mail fanning out from
> ssz.com with Sender: cypherpunks-owner@ssz.com and reconstruct the
> list in short order.

True, but in that case they can simply walk in with a subpeonae and take it
as well, it is sitting there in a plain text file. The reason I do this is to
minimize spammings and other such attacks it is not to protect anyone from a
truly determined assault but rather from those marketing idiots out there
with no clue as to anything close to reasonable behaviour.

And yes, I realize that this can be defeated by simply subscribing to the
mailing list and watching your incoming as you reference above.
(Hint: I ain't a marketing weenie)

There are other boogey-men than just TLA's....who in my opinion are the
easiest to deal with.

                                                    Jim Choate
                                                    CyberTects
                                                    ravage@ssz.com