At 01:35 PM 12/20/2002 -0800, Mike Rosing wrote:
On Fri, 20 Dec 2002, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> The moral equivalent of the pre-telegraph French semaphore soldiers
> doing the macarena...
> :-)
To the tune of "I'm a lumberjack and I'm ok".
:-)
Hey, you're hearing that more and more often in
At 03:01 PM 12/20/02 -0600, Anonymous wrote:
>Or, alternatively, if Crypto use by "everyday folks" was as common as,
saying, Gnutella file sharing, then it would be a HELL of a lot harder
for invisible ears to pick out potentially interesting encrypted files
(how many Gnutella files are shared each
On Fri, 20 Dec 2002, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> The moral equivalent of the pre-telegraph French semaphore soldiers
> doing the macarena...
> :-)
To the tune of "I'm a lumberjack and I'm ok".
:-)
Patience, persistence, truth,
Dr. mike
On Fri, 20 Dec 2002, Anonymous wrote:
> And I wonder...with international companies now cracking down on
> "Power-Users" of networks like Gnutella, one would think that
> building-in some crypto capabilities (say into Kazaa) could be
> something "regular" people might be willing to pay for. (Or, a
"It has been mentioned that you should always use crypto. If you wait until you
actually have something private to send, then an adversary will know exactly which
message is important."
Or, alternatively, if Crypto use by "everyday folks" was as common as, saying,
Gnutella file sharing, then i
At 10:27 AM 12/20/02 -0800, Mike Rosing wrote:
>
>Also check out "The Art of War" where Sun Tzu describes using
>signals to confuse the enemy. We're not doing anything new here,
>the toys are just more fun to play with is all :-)
The moral equivalent of the pre-telegraph French semaphore soldiers
message is important. Encrypting everything gives equal
| suspicion to each message and nobody has the resources to attack all of your
| mail.
|
| So, I was thinking that rather than just encrypt each message, why not just
| keep a constant encrypted stream open? So, even when you are asleep
On Fri, 20 Dec 2002, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> Very good, sir. Your next assignment is to read about Mixmaster
> anonymous remailer networks. Generally sending uniformly-sized (padded
> or fragmented or noise) blocks at regular intervals is preferable (and
> equivalent)
> to your suggestion o
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The main problem to solve as I see it would be for legitimate recipients to
> be able to determine when a message is real and not trash, without letting
> an adversary know.
Access such page via http. Sometimes it's a streamed webcam, sometimes
it's
ge is important. Encrypting everything gives equal
>suspicion to each message and nobody has the resources to attack all of
your
>mail.
>
>So, I was thinking that rather than just encrypt each message, why not
just
>keep a constant encrypted stream open? So, even when you are aslee
and nobody has the resources to attack all of your
mail.
So, I was thinking that rather than just encrypt each message, why not just
keep a constant encrypted stream open? So, even when you are asleep,
computers at each node are bombarding each other with encrypted "junk"
files. You
11 matches
Mail list logo
