cryptoanarchy.wiki

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

1998-04-22 - Re: Position escrow

Header Data

From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>
To: frantz@netcom.com
Message Hash: cf96850201f7a557aeff16421ce134dc63268b9c555f220afe4dfcb607596fb4
Message ID: <199804222049.NAA26335@servo.qualcomm.com>
Reply To: <v03110713b16406e293aa@[207.94.249.80]>
UTC Datetime: 1998-04-22 20:49:37 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 13:49:37 -0700 (PDT)

Raw message

From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 13:49:37 -0700 (PDT)
To: frantz@netcom.com
Subject: Re: Position escrow
In-Reply-To: <v03110713b16406e293aa@[207.94.249.80]>
Message-ID: <199804222049.NAA26335@servo.qualcomm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>Part of the problem in devising technical fixes for this problem is that
>the technology needs some idea of position in order to operate.  Even if we
>keep it to, "somewhere in cell X", there is incentive to make cells smaller
>as usage increases.

Very true.

>One interesting, but unlikely possibility is an originate-only phone which
>pays for calls with cash (e.g. Digicash, or a prepaid phone activation
>card).  Since it can't receive calls, it doesn't need an identity.  What
>would come out of the system is, "Someone in cell X called telephone number
>Y."

There's already a way to do this: cloning. This is not always done
just to avoid paying for service.  Certain cloners are entirely able
and willing to pay for cellular service, but they demand anonymity.

Somebody should point out to the carriers that they could get rid of
much of the incentive to clone phones if they simply offered a
legit way to remain anonymous.

Phil

Thread