- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

No Subject
by nowhere＠bsu-cs.bsu.edu 23 Feb '93

23 Feb '93

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Xavier hit the nail on the head -- my note was a subterfuge, intended to reveal the association between anonymous id's and email addresses. I think it's wrong for anon.penet.fi to operate this way. > DEADBEAT -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.1 iQBFAgUBK4lD7/FZTpBW/B35AQGiCQF9HFeDhXk7FV9mhIMh9zGmxblLvCt8bszr 4daRmyo8/cJMK7Y5V7kfQN05CEdJo6oc =KalQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi. *IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to update(a)anon.penet.fi for details.

2 1

unsubscribe
by Bruce.Baugh＠p23.f40.n105.z1.fidonet.org 23 Feb '93

23 Feb '93

I find that I must ask to have this address removed from your mailing list. Sorry for the inconvenience. UUCP !qiclab!therose INTERNET: therose.fidonet.org FIDONET: 1:105/7.0 UUCP <> FidoNet(tm) Gate is a public service provided by therose.pdx.com. **Reply messages should not be sent to/through therose.pdx.com**

1 0

No Subject
by nowhere＠bsu-cs.bsu.edu 23 Feb '93

23 Feb '93

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > This puts any message to anon.penet.fi into a file called Bitbucket. > My slocal.pl script does not support the slocal/maildelivery feature > which deletes a message, so this is the closest I can come. (I suppose > another alternative would be to pipe it into "cat > /dev/null". That > would look like: > > Request-Remailing-To anon.penet.fi pipe A "cat > /dev/null" > > I haven't tried this one.) I think this is exactly the wrong thing to do. Cypherpunks remailers are essential for preventing accidental exposure of Finnish pseudonyms. DEADBEAT -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.1 iQBFAgUBK4mwX/FZTpBW/B35AQF94gGAqqTUhXSKlb6CcsXNJ9T1eq2Hf5Qs3MKt N18Y20a+azul5d/Y4DnMfD62sCWhMD/v =A5c6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi. *IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to update(a)anon.penet.fi for details.

1 0

Re: Beware of anon.penet.fi message!
by an5877＠anon.penet.fi 23 Feb '93

23 Feb '93

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- David, > As was said, the doubleblind system is a great idea, but incomplete > if you want to correspond to someone without revealing your anon id. Well, I don't agree that doubleblind is a great idea. For example, if at any time, Alice sends pseudonymously to Bob, Bob can not reply directly: this would expose his identity at anon.penet.fi. Bob must reply through a remailer. Note the irony -- Bob must take special steps to protect his pseudonym because anon.penet.fi is acting affirmatively to conceal his actual identity. If Bob slips up and simply replies, he is exposed. Hal, > (It's interesting that he also sent his message via one of the Cypherpunks > remailers. Maybe he thought they worked like the Penet remailer and > he could break anonymity on those as well.) Actually, I don't know why my message went through a Cypherpunks remailer -- I didn't ask it to. I don't know of any weaknesses in the Cypherpunks remailers (other than extreme vulnerability to social engineering). > Evidentally there is positive harm that can occur by automatically > anonymizing all messages which pass through a remailer. ... For > anonymous posting and for mail to a non-anonymous address, it's more > reasonable to assume that anonymization is desired. ... But when > sending a message to an anonymous address, it's not known whether the > sender wants to be anonymized or not. I think it's imperative that the sender use X-Anon-To to be pseudonymous. This is consistent with the principle of least astonishment. > It might seem that people should just be careful about what they > send through Penet, but there are some problems with this. What do > you do if you get a message from an5877(a)anon.penet.fi asking for > advice on cryptography mailing lists? If you reply, your questioner > can figure out who the reply is coming from, and sees your Penet > alias. There is no way to prevent this from happening currently. A Cypherpunks remailer can be used to conceal the correspondent's pseudonymous identity. > Also, I have seen proposals that anonymous ID's should be made less > recognizable, so that instead of an5877(a)anon.penet.fi we would have > joe(a)serv.uba.edu. In such a situation it might be tedious to > scrutinize every email address we send to (via replies, for example) > to make sure it isn't a remailer where you have an anonymous ID. It would be a real boon to make pseudonyms less prominent -- this seems to have kicked over a hornet's nest on USENET (even though pseudonyms have been quietly in use for years). But were this the case, scrutiny would be an understatement. > All in all, I think some changes need to be made in how anonymous > addresses are used and implemented in order to provide reasonable > amounts of security. I agree that more discussion is in order. I'm especially concerned about the broader issues regarding anonymity through remailers. DEADBEAT -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.1 iQBFAgUBK4mrrvFZTpBW/B35AQE+PQGAh69FcaATFD05lIuhqqK8ZMmV+8xNi/LN 7kxDSgFgB9J/A9rRgAL6S1Ux2ojU4opP =RGlc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi. *IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to update(a)anon.penet.fi for details.

1 0

Re: Remailer to anon.penet.f
by an5877＠anon.penet.fi 23 Feb '93

23 Feb '93

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > This puts any message to anon.penet.fi into a file called Bitbucket. > My slocal.pl script does not support the slocal/maildelivery feature > which deletes a message, so this is the closest I can come. (I suppose > another alternative would be to pipe it into "cat > /dev/null". That > would look like: > > Request-Remailing-To anon.penet.fi pipe A "cat > /dev/null" > > I haven't tried this one.) I think this is exactly the wrong thing to do. Cypherpunks remailers are essential for preventing accidental exposure of Finnish pseudonyms. DEADBEAT -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.1 iQBFAgUBK4mwX/FZTpBW/B35AQF94gGAqqTUhXSKlb6CcsXNJ9T1eq2Hf5Qs3MKt N18Y20a+azul5d/Y4DnMfD62sCWhMD/v =A5c6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi. *IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to update(a)anon.penet.fi for details.

1 0

Re: Beware of anon.penet.fi message!
by an5877＠anon.penet.fi 23 Feb '93

23 Feb '93

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Xavier hit the nail on the head -- my note was a subterfuge, intended to reveal the association between anonymous id's and email addresses. I think it's wrong for anon.penet.fi to operate this way. > DEADBEAT -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.1 iQBFAgUBK4lD7/FZTpBW/B35AQGiCQF9HFeDhXk7FV9mhIMh9zGmxblLvCt8bszr 4daRmyo8/cJMK7Y5V7kfQN05CEdJo6oc =KalQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi. *IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to update(a)anon.penet.fi for details.

1 0

whistleblower newsgroup?
by ld231782＠longs.lance.colostate.edu 23 Feb '93

23 Feb '93

Mulling over K. Goen's somewhat rambling, irate, and paranoid prose (but nevertheless mildly entertaining) has caused various random ideas to pop into my head on how to get pseudonymity/anonymity into the mainstream and even the spotlight, toward the goal of widespread public recognition, acceptance, and use to the point of dependence, all in a nonthreatening way. First of all, there have been a lot of famous uses of anonymity and pseudonymity, esp. in literature. It might be interesting for PR purposes to collect a long list of everyone who has used aliases. When people start saying `wow, he's my favorite author, I didn't know he was someone else' that would be great. A sort of long history of anonymity and pseudonymity would be perfect. Deep Throat, Voltaire, Mark Twain, I think even Scott Fitzgerald was a pseudonym. Also, what about anonymous letters? Did Martin Luther first post the `indulgence complaints' anonymously? I'm sure there's some cases where anonymous information changed the course of world history significantly (esp. during wars). Anonymous tips leading to big busts, that kind of thing. (Remember the Lockerbie plane terrorist crash? There was an anonymous tip to authorities that virtually pinpointed the flight origination and bomb mechanism.) Anybody know any, please send them to me, and I'll summarize to the group and credit you. (please give references where possible.) If it works out I'll donate it to K. Goen, assuming he hasn't been arrested or hospitalized by then :) Next idea: How about a newsgroup devoted to `whistleblowing' where anonymity is encouraged? It could even be `anonymously moderated' where all the postings are guaranteed to go through an anonymous server before posting. (Whoever wanted to be *really* sure could anonymize the message before posting.) I haven't seen *any* newsgroups dedicated to looking at government abuses from the "inside" (this would be for employees esp.) I can imagine all kinds of neat little secrets about our government's illustrious practices leaking out.. The potential for `good' is good, esp. if the notices refer to ways of *saving money* and *eliminating waste*. A sort of patriotic taxpayer watchdog group! Although the possibility for `bad' is good too, people might just use it as a way of getting revenge. (Despite what others may think here, I hope it wouldn't turn into a sort of perpetual incitement to revolution and anarchy...) The group might overlap into private industry too, although the federal government assuredly provides the most fodder... Now, think about how much immense *press* and *publicity* that some government abuses get. They can really be legendary (remember the $600 toilet seats?). Now, suppose that just coincidentally a major press story that got out *originated* in this anonymous group. Wow! That would be a story in itself, worthy of the evening news. Can't you imagine some blank-faced, clueless reporter saying ``the story was first reported on a network bulletin board devoted to anonymous reporting of government abuses.'' Allright! Hey, it could get to the point where reporters start watching it for hot tips! There are already a lot of big Washington groups that try to monitor the government, and this could be a real catalyst for them. So I'm putting out the idea. Maybe someone well-versed in the newsgroup addition protocol can take care of the details. (Ladies and gentlemen, fasten your seat belts, I think we're in for some hellacious turbulence ahead...)

3 2

No Subject
by nowhere＠bsu-cs.bsu.edu 23 Feb '93

23 Feb '93

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- This is a longer response to the warning posted by Xavier. > Beware of the message about the security bug in the > anon.penet.fi software! Indeed. > If you do as requested, and send your true email address to > an5877(a)anon.penet.fi then he will see both your true email > address and your anonymous address (if you have one - if you > don't, you will be assigned one and he will see that). Any > future use you make of this anonymous server (say, to post > anonymously) will appear under that same anonymous address - and > this person will know your true email address that goes with > it. You got me. I meant only slight malice here: I had intended to "expose" a few email/anon associations to highlight the problem. The problem became apparent to me when I sent pseudonymous mail to a prominent person on this list; his reply exposed his pseudonymous id at anon.penet.fi, surely without his knowledge. > an5877's message appears to be a trick, designed to collect > anonymous/real address pairs. Johan Helsingius should take > action against this trickster. Since he is learning other > people's real addresses, perhaps it would be appropriate for his > own real address to be revealed. Now that would be a _very_ serious "bug" in the anon.penet.fi remailer (or, more accurately, in its administration); I am confident Johan Helsingius will reject this suggestion. > But, this does point out that these systems which automatically > assign anonymous addrsses have several security flaws. Johan > has already had to introduce a "password" feature to make it > more difficult to send fakemail that appears to be from a > particular email address through the server, thus revealing the > corresponding anonymous address when it is delivered. I think that merely masks the real problem. > an5877's trick is a variant on one discussed in > news.admin.policy where it is pointed out that you can mail to > someone via anon.penet.fi and ask for information; when the > return mail comes back it will be from that person's anonymous > address. So again you can pair up real and anonymous > addresses. I missed that discussion, or I wouldn't have wasted your (our) time. > These are serious problems. We need some discussion of how to > avoid these simple tricks for defeating the anonymity while > still having an easy-to-use system. Any ideas? For starters, I think the default behavior of anon.penet.fi is badly broken. But a more serious problem with anon.penet.fi and the other remailers I am aware of is the necessity that we pseudonymous clients have to rely on the integrity of their administrators to keep our pseudonyms private. In the face of social pressure, such as Xavier's, that may be asking a lot. > ::Xavier:: DEADBEAT -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.1 iQBFAgUBK4lr4/FZTpBW/B35AQGqeAF/UBefmNprQacueYazdvhAKMF4nA+2vl44 /+FMACnWjd7yaoG99VeyhO/S6vptT1UB =yZRb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi. *IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to update(a)anon.penet.fi for details.

1 0

No Subject
by nowhere＠bsu-cs.bsu.edu 23 Feb '93

23 Feb '93

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > I would like to let everyone who hasn't already figured it out > know that I did *not* originate the message that was posted to > Cypherpunks through my account. I do not know where it came from, > but it reached my account with the destination address of the > cypherpunks list because the message that came back to me from the > list said that "Anonymous <nowhere(a)bsu-cs.bsu.edu>" originated the > message. That indicates that it went through the remailer. If it > were from me, it would say "Chael Hall <nowhere(a)bsu-cs.bsu.edu>" > as the return address. Another identifying characteristic is the > "X-Remailed-By: Anonymous <nowhere(a)bsu-cs.bsu.edu>" header line. > Just remember, don't believe everything you read. In the case of pseudonymous mail, don't believe _anything_ you read! I don't see why Chael Hall is going to all this trouble to refute a message that I don't even remember ... Did I miss something important? (Or outre?) Or (duh!) is he talking about _my_ earlier message? DEADBEAT -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.1 iQBFAgUBK4lx8vFZTpBW/B35AQGnfwF/YdHtdc6B+oslFno9+rCowlph7GteEZF+ ot8jlZRA+gW+Sa1bpBUkV6ZryBlHYQMQ =KMZW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi. *IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to update(a)anon.penet.fi for details.

1 0

Re: Remailer Use
by an5877＠anon.penet.fi 23 Feb '93

23 Feb '93

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > I would like to let everyone who hasn't already figured it out > know that I did *not* originate the message that was posted to > Cypherpunks through my account. I do not know where it came from, > but it reached my account with the destination address of the > cypherpunks list because the message that came back to me from the > list said that "Anonymous <nowhere(a)bsu-cs.bsu.edu>" originated the > message. That indicates that it went through the remailer. If it > were from me, it would say "Chael Hall <nowhere(a)bsu-cs.bsu.edu>" > as the return address. Another identifying characteristic is the > "X-Remailed-By: Anonymous <nowhere(a)bsu-cs.bsu.edu>" header line. > Just remember, don't believe everything you read. In the case of pseudonymous mail, don't believe _anything_ you read! I don't see why Chael Hall is going to all this trouble to refute a message that I don't even remember ... Did I miss something important? (Or outre?) Or (duh!) is he talking about _my_ earlier message? DEADBEAT -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.1 iQBFAgUBK4lx8vFZTpBW/B35AQGnfwF/YdHtdc6B+oslFno9+rCowlph7GteEZF+ ot8jlZRA+gW+Sa1bpBUkV6ZryBlHYQMQ =KMZW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi. *IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to update(a)anon.penet.fi for details.

1 0