From: 3umoelle@informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Ulf =?ISO-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=)
Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 18:46:52 +0800
To: kent@songbird.com
Subject: Re: Anonymous Remailers
In-Reply-To: <19970515192926.34411@bywater.songbird.com>
Message-ID: <9705161034.AA54548@public.uni-hamburg.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> Hmm.  I did read, and I thought I understood this.  I claim that if
> the remailers collude, then there in no anonymity.  Correct?

Correct.

> Even if I insert my own remailer in the list it doesn't help, if the
> others are all in cahoots.  This seems pretty obvious.  They all
> compare logs, and saved copies of the messages, and my message can
> be tracked from beginning to end.  Right?

Wrong. One trusted mix is enough to guarantee anonymity: There is a
large number of fixed-size messages coming in and a large number of
messages going out in random order.  (Consult the archives for
information about possible attacks, such as flooding a remailer with
dummy messages, and how to detect/prevent them.)

> I see a list of remailers posted on cypherpunks periodically -- a
> "cypherpunks" approved list, therefore.  Lucky Green admits publically
> that he personally knows several of the remailer operators.

So you say Raph actually *is* part of the cypherpunk conspirary??!

BTW, that list is the "list of reliable remailers", not the "list of
cypherpunk approved remailers".  Now guess how a remailer qualifies to
be listed.

> And clearly, remailer operators must share a common ideological
> focus...

Remailer operators share the belief that it must be possible to use
the net anonymously, without leaving traces.  Is that what you mean?

PS: Did you know that one remailer operator formerly was a soldier in
East Germany's National People's Army?

-- 
|\/| L~ |\ | | <~  /\
|  | L_ |/ \_/ _> /~~\