Forwarded message:
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 17:45:58 -0400 From: "Robert A. Costner" <pooh@efga.org> Subject: Re: encouraging digital pseudonyms
Perhaps I am missing something here. I find it easy to distinguish type-I anonymous traffic from nym mail. Anonymous mail usually comes from an address like 'anon@' or 'nobody@' while pseudonymous mail will come from a pseudonym.
A pseudonym and an anonymous account are NOT the same thing. That is what you are missing. 'ravage' is a 'nym that I have been using since about '82 or '83 (I used 'ogre' and 'ghost' before that), I have NEVER used an account such as 'anon<foo>@bar.com' while I do generate traffic under other short-term 'nym's. The only reason anonymous mail comes as 'anon@' or 'nobody@' is because that is the way they are currently set up. If an anon-remailer were serious about long-term survival the output accounts would look just like the user accounts and not something as blatent as the above. Anonymous remailers will have arrived when they quit using the simple patterning as above and they figure out how to charge for their services (anonymous privacy is a commodity with a worth, seriously undervalued in todays market). ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|