6 expanded posts ยท every known parent and child
Yes, subject says it all. anon.penet.fi was a whole lot worse than cypherpunks remailers. It provided clueless users with no real security, because it stored return addresses and did not use chaining and encryption. Maybe closing of anon.penet.fi will spur real interest from the unwashed alt.sex.* masses to the truly secure remailers. - Igor.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Sun, 1 Sep 1996, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Yes, subject says it all. anon.penet.fi was a whole lot worse than > cypherpunks remailers. It provided clueless users with no real security, > because it stored return addresses and did not use chaining and > encryption. It also provided anonymity to many people who needed it. I think that many people who need anonymity will probably just learn faking mail and news headers. Many people just don't want to deal with cpunk remailers. OTOH, I agree that this might actually force many people with Penet addresses to learn about more secure remailers. In this way, the closing of anon.penet.fi could be looked upon as a Good Thing. However, as long as there is no easy way for Windoze and Mac users to use secure remailers, users will sooner resort to fake-mailing then learning how to use cpunk remailers. People that need a pseudonym address to use on various support groups can get them from other, equally insecure, remailers. - -- Mark PGP encrypted mail prefered. Key fingerprint = d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348 http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMinwTizIPc7jvyFpAQFpGAf/ZGEXRU7MuROtatlHoAIdaJfIiwig1oDr fwlNjRe7f1ze8dwUuh74nWFt/ofPtjwSUtpCa1xDgTptPPhzr1I6beOdjwONlUzf MVif+wnzyIp27V/DCjebAMxQc2avmYKM6mwcOKfzFwG0cfvf/walJrjmADR9K0oe EXqi7mJzY1rI08Dsw8aHXNj8maDy9pRTSz9O9e0qZTdFlQtFyVNM6PSfAnKR9e1L ebQ5Yx4qNkgkfhDZgacKNv2inkyuD1LsyQneiCIZ0obhhRL7ORU63wGgYlvqc3gx Ux8sK2mMo6kr2dvA07nRyLzl3w9vm6efrFJeZC94fjdBYxluFg6/ag== =+Qm6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Mark M. wrote: > On Sun, 1 Sep 1996, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Yes, subject says it all. anon.penet.fi was a whole lot worse than > > cypherpunks remailers. It provided clueless users with no real security, > > It also provided anonymity to many people who needed it. I think that many > people who need anonymity will probably just learn faking mail and news > headers. Many people just don't want to deal with cpunk remailers. OTOH, I > agree that this might actually force many people with Penet addresses to learn > about more secure remailers. In this way, the closing of anon.penet.fi could > be looked upon as a Good Thing. However, as long as there is no easy way for > Windoze and Mac users to use secure remailers, users will sooner resort to > fake-mailing then learning how to use cpunk remailers. People that need a > pseudonym address to use on various support groups can get them from other, > equally insecure, remailers. I believe that Private Idaho is a cypherpunks remailer client for Windows. - Igor.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Sun, 1 Sep 1996, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > I believe that Private Idaho is a cypherpunks remailer client for Windows. True. But it is a seperate program from email clients which means that anyone wanting to use Private Idaho has to download it, install it, and learn how to use it in conjunction with one's email program. Most people who may have a need for anonymity have probably never heard of PGP or Private Idaho. I think that until remailer functions are actually built into the programs that people use, remailer use will be rare. - -- Mark PGP encrypted mail prefered. Key fingerprint = d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348 http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMipNqizIPc7jvyFpAQFy0Qf+LbMgy3PBJ+ipGbxblKbjEm09aiziLEpD p7JCudf6TrBUdF+2PwTdxK/sOCITE9lTwbycAgeCvEYNUJEbsR3a6ix5fxbQuF8p Y9/tEbLVESUz0/+UthVnBasbFsCOzHV+ztlIRIk8SEEJKxsu8cNRZqcjaAqH5Q1A dmBKZ9KGQWPNuc5oLfqahyzroa8kAG59HSDm+ntV9fwduKNi8wSV6WFmA2s9pnZa +yRRXmSm4PkWVXgNdQCosTTcD1enSIBcH2WAQu1jpDZbbs6+6v1KvdPa5+WOvTs3 kpBfFBlsmVkWJS63ouqDb7yihoq/qZvhyE2Fske8uVYh9M5Ffn9AKg== =md6D -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> headers. Many people just don't want to deal with cpunk remailers. OTOH, I > agree that this might actually force many people with Penet addresses to learn > about more secure remailers. In this way, the closing of anon.penet.fi could > be looked upon as a Good Thing. However, as long as there is no easy way for > Windoze and Mac users to use secure remailers, users will sooner resort to > fake-mailing then learning how to use cpunk remailers. People that need a > pseudonym address to use on various support groups can get them from other, > equally insecure, remailers. I've put up a list of remailer front ends, sorted by platform, at http://yakko.cs.wmich.edu/~frogfarm/free/crypt.html#private I welcome all additions. Right now, I have links to Private Idaho (Windows), Yet Another NewsWatcher (Mac), and PGPMR/2 for OS/2 (requires MailReader/2). Nym servers and cpunk remailers are poised to take off, if those who wish to use them are capable of learning. The rest of us can either try to teach 'em in a non-condescending manner, or continue to work on front end utilities. -- http://yakko.cs.wmich.edu/~frogfarm ...for the best in unapproved information "We think people like seeing somebody in a uniform on the porch." -US Postal spokeswoman, quoted in AP 1/27/96. I don't know about you, but the only folks I know who'd enjoy seeing someone in uniform on their porch are leathermen...
! Yes, subject says it all. anon.penet.fi was a whole lot worse than
! cypherpunks remailers. It provided clueless users with no real security,
! because it stored return addresses and did not use chaining and
! encryption.
!
! Maybe closing of anon.penet.fi will spur real interest from the unwashed
! alt.sex.* masses to the truly secure remailers.
There has to be more crypto anonymizing aliasing remailers and with easier
interfaces. Closing the Kleinpaste derived server will help put the
pressure of demand to start better remailer systems. There's not enough
capacity and reliability with the servers extant. There should be
thousands of full featured remailers.
We'll help out as soon as we can get the hardware problems we have figured
out and provided there's understandably configurable linux networking
software out there.
Would it be a good idea to have a 100% open server that anyone can
telnet in and copy all the e-mail data? If the chaining crypto
remailers are reliable, there's no reason why not, except the risk of
clock cycle cryptanalysis. There should be an easy way of preventing
those attacks, if not, the data can be read accessable only after the
{de|en}cryption. This openness should go a long way in protection
so far as liability is concerned.
In other words, if Big Brother can force his way into your privacy,
why not little brother?