Re: Re: Remailer Phases

2001-08-08 Thread Joseph Ashwood
- Original Message - From: "Anonymous" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 4:48 PM Subject: CDR: Re: Remailer Phases > An Unknown Party wrote: > > On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Anonymous wrote: > > > We need a

Re: Remailer Phases

2001-08-08 Thread Anonymous
An Unknown Party wrote: > On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Anonymous wrote: > > We need a good mixmaster net. > > > > working remailer: > > 1. Average latency less than 5 min > > Bad. See the papers done on threats of traffic analysis/spam attacks > against remailers. "Average latency" exists. What do yo

Re: CDR: Re: re: Remailer Phases

2001-08-08 Thread Joseph Ashwood
- Original Message - From: "Meyer Wolfsheim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 5:40 AM Subject: Re: CDR: Re: re: Remailer Phases > On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Joseph Ashwood wrote: > > > > > 2. Operator pro

Re: Remailer Phases

2001-08-08 Thread Tim May
On Tuesday, August 7, 2001, at 08:13 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Anonymous wrote: > >> 1. Average latency less than 5 min > > Bad: traffic analysis. Latency (via delay) should be random between two > set points. Depends on traffic rates. If fewer than 10 messages per

Re: Remailer Phases

2001-08-08 Thread measl
On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Anonymous wrote: > 1. Average latency less than 5 min Bad: traffic analysis. Latency (via delay) should be random between two set points. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give se

Re: CDR: Re: re: Remailer Phases

2001-08-08 Thread Meyer Wolfsheim
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Joseph Ashwood wrote: > > > 2. Operator probably trustworthy > > > > Impossible, and unnecessary. Don't assume any remops are trustworthy. > > Actually it is absolutely necessary. If all operators are willing to > collude, then your precious anonymity is completely lost. A s

Re: Remailer Phases

2001-08-08 Thread measl
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Tim May wrote: > Depends on traffic rates. If fewer than 10 messages per hour, then 5 > minutes delay ("latency") is obviously not diffusive enough. If more > than 100 messages per hour, then 5 minutes gives a diffusivity or fanout > of about 10, which is a useful amount. >

Re: re: Remailer Phases

2001-08-08 Thread Joseph Ashwood
- Original Message - From: "A. Melon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: CDR: re: Remailer Phases > > 2. Operator probably trustworthy > > Impossible, and unnecessary. Don't assume any remops are trustworthy. Actually it is absolutely necessary. If all