From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: 40031d1d6b3c0dff6ee6f905a5c987bd587cd181005d7be05c6cecca0fcc2da6
Message ID: <199706190724.JAA17576@basement.replay.com>
Reply To: <v02140b01afcbb73285d2@[206.184.194.206]>
UTC Datetime: 1997-06-19 07:34:40 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 15:34:40 +0800
From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 15:34:40 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: Receiving Messages Anonymously
In-Reply-To: <v02140b01afcbb73285d2@[206.184.194.206]>
Message-ID: <199706190724.JAA17576@basement.replay.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
pdh@best.com (Peter Hendrickson) wrote:
> Receiving anonymous messages is still an open problem. The solutions
> we have so far are cumbersome to operate. They also depend on a chain
> of machines remaining up and reliable for a long time, which is
> expensive.
>
> A quick solution is to use the list to send anonymous messages. It is
> inexpensive to tell if a message is encrypted for a key you control so
> it is cheap to find messages you can read.
An anonymous message pool. How is this different from posting to
alt.anonymous.messages? (Other than it would annoy list readers. :)
Return to June 1997
Return to “pdh@best.com (Peter Hendrickson)”