cryptoanarchy.wiki

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

1998-01-12 - Re: Eternity Services

Header Data

From: David Miller <dm0@avana.net>
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Message Hash: cde54f2b3c27d78a0afa455b3d6f46935f760772240a0ddd732be5bb5dc1e269
Message ID: <34B96667.28BD98CB@avana.net>
Reply To: <v03102800b0deac61cffd@[207.167.93.63]>
UTC Datetime: 1998-01-12 00:44:04 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 08:44:04 +0800

Raw message

From: David Miller <dm0@avana.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 08:44:04 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: Eternity Services
In-Reply-To: <v03102800b0deac61cffd@[207.167.93.63]>
Message-ID: <34B96667.28BD98CB@avana.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Tim May wrote:
 
> In terms of "work factor," such connections are nearly worthless. They
> might be a bit harder to trap or trace than typical connections, but they
> are only "security through obscurity" compared to the effort to break a
> typical cipher.

Even if the signals can be distributed on par with the distribution
of the data itself?  Could this be a 'meta' application that has not
been
considered?  Perhaps not, because sigint analysis normally increases an
attacker's intelligence on the subject and doesn't decrease it.

> (Put another way, would you feel safe hosting a child porn site just
> because some of the links were over ham radio or the like? I wouldn't. I'd
> be waiting for the FCC vans to triangulate....or for the cellphone
> companies to "cooperate," as they so often have.)

No, I wouldn't either.  Your point here indicates that whereas
historically
privacy was increased through movement, the reverse may be true now or
at least at some future date.  Namely, that entities are (or will be)
tracked by their movement and not simply location.

--David Miller

middle  rival
devil rim lad

Windows '95 -- a dirty, two-bit operating system.

Thread