Ted Ts'o is right that anonymity can be used for many harmful purposes. On the other hand, as Tim May suggests, attempts to control the flow of information can easily lead to restrictions which do more harm than what they try to prevent. Although I assume that most people here share a commitment to the overall goals of what Tim calls "crypto anarchy", it's possible that we all have different reasons for our support. My own angle is that these techniques enhance privacy and provide power to individuals which can counterbalance the influence and authority of large institutions. I've been influenced in this mostly by the papers of David Chaum. For me, crypto anarchy is a way to oppose the constantly growing databases of information about each person, a way for individuals to take control of information about their own lives. This is why I like one particular justification for anonymous posting that I read, that people should be free to choose for themselves how much information to reveal when they post. I worry that, although the networks are in their infancy today, there may come a time when all information ever posted to Usenet is online, accessible, and searchable in a few seconds. The posters' email addresses may be cross-linked to their current names and addresses. Anything you post today may come back twenty years from now to haunt you. (Already, the archives are being kept, so all that is needed is technological improvements to put the information on-line and allow that huge volume of data to be usefully searched.) Now, you may say, so what, 99% of what is posted on Usenet couldn't possibly interest anyone anyway, and besides, I'm not posting anything anyone would care about. This may be true, but think about how much you reveal about yourself over a period of time if you are an active poster. Imagine all of that information being available to every potential employer or new neighbor. Imagine trying to run for public office! I simply don't like the idea of everyone I meet potentially knowing my hobbies, interests, political affiliations, sexual preferences, and so on. These same considerations apply in many other areas of our lives. Financial transactions can supply a lot of the same information. So can phone records. Perhaps someday our cars will be tracked routinely to collect information about where we go. Uncomfortable as I may be with personal and private facts being used by marketers and employers to evaluate me, there is also the possibility of even more sinister uses. Imagine how a dictatorship could exploit this much detailed information about the daily lives of its subjects. Probably "that will never happen here" but the mere possibility should provide another reason to guard our privacy. I imagine most people here agree with the thrust of these arguments, so I won't go on. But the point is that anonymous/pseudonymous communications can provide real benefits to all members of society. It's not just a romantic attraction to bomb-throwing revolutionaries or an elitist desire to escape the clutching hands of the greedy masses whcih drives us. I believe that the benefits that crypto anonymity can provide to society will clearly outweigh the problems. Hal Finney 74076.1041@compuserve.com