Re: Message Havens
Your analysis is interesting, but so far fetched I'm not going to worry about it. I mean, yes, if the 5 billion people of earth decide to do this, or decide to call each other, or decide to send each other snail mail, everything will collapse. Considering this as a worst case, in my opinion, is a waste for right now, and will deter useful work before it even starts. Agreed. I guess what I was trying to say (though I didn't actually come out and say it) is that the load is O(N^2). While not a problem now, it would be nice to find an O(N) solution. Or, more likely, an O(Nlog(N)).
Plus, it is ONLY necessary to retreive all messages if you don't want it know who you are communicating with. If you don't care if it is known you communicate with some psuedonym, then you don't have to get all the messages. The primary goal is to not mail messages out since that is where most the complaints against anonymous remailers lie. Indeed. If we go with a restricted message haven, the problem becomes very simple. Maybe we should attempt to get this working first.
SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N wrote:
Agreed. I guess what I was trying to say (though I didn't actually come out and say it) is that the load is O(N^2). While not a problem now, it would be nice to find an O(N) solution. Or, more likely, an O(Nlog(N)).
Okay, I think that you are overlooking something which appears obvious (to me) but evidently it is not. I am guilty of skipping over some details. The fact that you take the messages from a haven or several havens or all the havens doesn't allow anybody to figure out if you are actually reading any of the messages! If message havens become popular, then (as you mentioned in a previous post) there may be hundreds set up for people to use. This would decrease the load on each one. If there many message havens to choose from each would only have to serve a few hundred or so people (much like banks). Again, only if you want to hide your pseudonym, you can simply download all the files and foil any logging on the part of the haven. It is NOT necessary to download all the files from ALL the havens. You just use your preferred one. If you get all the files from the haven you use (and ONLY the haven you use), you still leave the haven: a) unable to determine your pseudonym b) unable to figure out if any of the messages are indeed for you The haven would not be able to figure out if anybody is communicating with you since the haven can't be sure you are even reading the messages you grab. And if you do regularly receive messages at one haven, you can pick another one, and get all the message from both. And neither haven would be able to determine what messages you are reading, if any at all. You could get even fancier and communicate back to your friend via a different haven altogether, which you never go to. So before doing a detailed complexity analysis, I think it is best to think about the protocol a bit more. -- Karl L. Barrus: klbarrus@owlnet.rice.edu keyID: 5AD633 hash: D1 59 9D 48 72 E9 19 D5 3D F3 93 7E 81 B5 CC 32 "One man's mnemonic is another man's cryptography" - my compilers prof discussing file naming in public directories
participants (2)
-
Karl Lui Barrus -
SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N