-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- (Skip to end for actual remailer discussion.) PGP Slave, "If you insist :-) (Can you give me a few more days to comply?...I'm having some trouble getting a copy of your signature. One of the guys in the chem faculty says he knows where he can get one at the weekend...)" Thanks again. Now everyone knows to never tell YOU any secrets, no matter how trivial they might be, since you will post them. Who's the 'punk? and, "Hey bud, you`ve clearly misunderstood the whole point of the movement. You get whatever privacy you can make for yourself through technology. Any dolt who goes to the extent of using two remailers and a penet id to hide his identity then puts his nym`s secret key in his True Name signature file gets the privacy he deserves." I'm not sure you understand what -----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- means. Or were you fingering someone else? Am I missing something? I am using two remailers to help out with the lack of traffic, not to hide my identity. There are many levels of privacy, and the one I am concerned with does not involve anything other than that Usenetters who are NEWBIES being forced to contact me via e-mail. It also involves not having the people I work around who are not my close friends gossiping about, mindlessly, about "what I am trying to hide" with my use of PGP. This is a personal thing, and using a nickname on Usenet is as strong of security as I need to meet this need. When I joined this list and started using Cypherpunk remailers I decided to not maintain my anonymity in a vigorous manner. I think you are trying to show off what a super hacker you are by typing "last qwerty", or even just "finger qwerty" from outside, to see my local site that I telnet in from, then typing the master-hacker magic-line "rusers my.site". I am impressed that you too can type these commands, and you get the Xenon Hacker God Award for the entire year of 1994. However, I would rather talk about remailer security levels than trying to cope with someone embarrassing themselves posting their "discovery" of my "real identity". I am not "hiding my identity", I am maintaining a minimal amount of PERSONAL privacy, at a security level that fits my needs; I am using a NICKNAME. For this purpose, qwerty and catalyst serve me well. I'm not sure why you have so much fun disrespecting a person's privacy. I arrived here with a simple question, "Can I use your remailers for bulk mailing of 1-3MB a day to people wanting the PGP FAQ and MacPGP Guide? What are the qualities of each remailer?" I think I understand the movement quite well, but I understand there IS NO fully secure remailer network which I would bet my life on. And I understand and am acting upon what few seem to care about, which is getting a large number of people outside of the internet-skilled culture using secure encryption. There are 50-100 million Mac and Windows users, and the majority of those with a modem use their internet connection for simple e-mail ONLY. Many only HAVE e-mail in fact. PGP has mass media attention, but very few are using it since they can't get it by a 1-800 number. I hope ViaCrypt will change this, with Mac and Windows versions. -----BEGIN REMAILER DISCUSSION BLOCK----- and, "logs on netcom. I was just waving enough of a red rag at you to make the point forcefully... (remember your the one arguing against putting delays more than 15 minutes in a remailer system...)" Finally we are talking about remailers! Thank-you. My telnet log is public. Netcom's sendmail logs are not (?). There IS a difference. I was arguing against long delays, which should only be needed if no baseline traffic is going on. Many people will not be able to function well if say, mail is batched out at midnight. Rapid two-way communication is very important these days in getting ANYTHING done, be it above ground OR underground. and, "PS How to build your own mailer logs on netcom...just stay on long enough and keep typing `mailq`...no problemo...I can`t be bothered but if I could thats how I`d track traffic through qwerty for your $20..." Now you really do get an award, but not the $20 since that will go to the person who WAS downloading mailq logs from Netcom ;-). You seem to be absolutely right. Here is an outgoing piece of mail sent from qwerty: qwerty: mail alt.test@news.cs.indiana.edu Subject: Ignore ignore test. This is a test of 'mailq'. qwerty: mailq Mail Queue (58 requests) --Q-ID-- --Size-- -----Q-Time----- ------------Sender/Recipient------------ (much deleted....) UAA29300* 27 Wed Feb 2 20:13 qwerty alt.test@news.cs.indiana.edu And some incoming, as bounced off of hh@cicada.berkeley.edu: UAA29978* 6 Wed Feb 2 20:20 <hh@cicada.berkeley.edu> "|/u1/qwerty/remail/slocal.pl" slocal.pl is part of Hal's remailer scripts. So who has a remailer to send me that will avoid this? Looks like I'd not use qwerty or catalyst as the first or last stop in a remailing chain. But if the only way to track this is AS the mail arrives or goes out, I'd still classify qwerty/catalyst as being good for casual security uses such as my post to Usenet above. It would be a lot faster than anon.penet.fi! Then again, a person could blackmail someone for posting to alt.sex.bestiality. When can I and many others switch from Netcom to a pubic service Unix network that is private/secure? *Again, I'm trying to compile a list of remailers and what levels of security each entails. Such a list does not seem to exist. If you ever want more traffic.... -----END REMAILER DISCUSSION BLOCK----- PGP Slave, despite this misunderstanding, could we declare peace and get on with a discussion about REMAILERS, instead of my nickname. I'm out here to learn and try to contribute what I can. I am sending info about secure encryption to at least a dozen people a day, many of whom would not otherwise get their hands on PGP or even the PGP FAQ, and I have thus become the most prolific user of the Cypherpunk remailers. I am doing this randomly, chained between two remailer at a time. This volume could triple if I started advertising. I don't misunderstand the movement? -Nik (Xenon) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3 iQCVAgUBLVBTPASzG6zrQn1RAQH2/QP/dexRZeXe7KRZpADn+hCBUoUExelRJ6hv A6kARzcymCAa3571u1XDauIcmNTPXDQTQ4bf3D5x94eR2AM43NjPcVBWkZcUYgEk ROGkIP3fAFnpBCbn0RZPOhIfYt8NnvWY53knRd5JxJbJ6jQxjRG9SfADs2ip8Fpl v4p6WPlnFHM= =j2FI -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----