cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1998-01-19 - Re: Onion routing

Header Data

From: Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
To: Ulf M�ller <ulf@fitug.de>
Message Hash: 87ea16dbe5e667a23e6de319442f61680ec166bbfbdda9e75b3e38c76eb85f6c
Message ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980119102223.9263B-100000@pakastelohi.cypherpunks.to>
Reply To: <19980119013252.18949@ulf.mali.sub.org>
UTC Datetime: 1998-01-19 09:33:53 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 17:33:53 +0800

Raw message

From: Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 17:33:53 +0800
To: Ulf Mller <ulf@fitug.de>
Subject: Re: Onion routing
In-Reply-To: <19980119013252.18949@ulf.mali.sub.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980119102223.9263B-100000@pakastelohi.cypherpunks.to>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Mon, 19 Jan 1998, Ulf [iso-8859-1] Mller wrote:
> Does that mean that every onion router needs to maintain many
> encrypted links, or is there a more efficient solution?

To get any meaningful security, the user  has to control  the first OR.
Furthermore, it must be impossible to discern indiviual messages, meaning
connections being opened or  closed. Which requires Pipenet, possibly the
worst bandwidth burner ever  invented. :-)

-- Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to> PGP v5 encrypted email preferred.
   "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?"

Thread