Re: Mixmaster On A $20 Floppy?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The second paragraph of this post seems to address a different issue than the first. The problem of correlations between a certain sender sending and a certain receiver receiving, is well known and understood. The best defense against this (as a sender) is to send messages into the remailer network with a period equal to or less than the the time required for a message with your typical chain length to pass through the remailer net. If these are sent at random intervals, then your real mail will blend with the cover traffic, and mail from you will correlate with all message receipts by all message recipients. The second paragraph seems to deal with the issue of being known as an anonymous remailer or regular remailer user. I am not sure exactly what the concern with that is. -Lance At 11:56 PM 1/5/96, Futplex wrote:
The "ultimate" traffic analysis problem, as others have observed, is the correlation between messages sent by A and received by B via the overall network. Hence the utility of a Dining Cryptographers' Net, PipeNet, etc. in which the apparent bandwidth variation between any two points is eliminated. A and B are effectively folded into the network.
I suppose that a site that escapes detection as a Mixmaster will throw off the correlation stats (i.e. because a message from that site to B won't be identified as a remailed message). But such sites are elusive objects I think. On the one hand, the site can't endure for long, or else its throughput traffic will likely give it away as an anonymizer (i.e. it gets lots of mail from the Mix network, and sends out similar amounts of mail to all sorts of people and the network). On the other hand, it had better last, or else it will look suspicious as a transient account receiving mail from the Mix network, sending a few messages, and quickly vanishing.
Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com> "Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor, not a bricklayer!"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMO9nDfPzr81BVjMVAQF1YQgAo08ndnu7Lcok3O12hCYz57j+PClp8ulk LRRGGejhTNerums+FInio2IUQK3YvWLsIUj+UkZZkYPGAV292AsKnQROzBAYZ2kd V8MdVUqolZQfFzR7VYS2n+6ARlplff0E+58X2NDHgw25welmg7Id/xJmjiIwHI8J U6eGUw0BhMKrQuXCv4NpUsYGC2ux2abOs+Y2f4pjzSSyJhLuAXJbzlr0eRYWPOj7 AU2AAs/l4xTGbErYc2F5D9pfTJe6sMkUCseIyVpsoLUMsg24LItlDOUq1feT2ppq X1LJQRu05ERt3LIhjB5JHFClxecQyw31JDZV8E2H19mawK1LIkgKNA== =MU1s -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ---------------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell loki@obscura.com PGP 2.6 key available by finger or server. Mixmaster, the next generation remailer, is now available! http://obscura.com/~loki/Welcome.html or FTP to obscura.com "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche ----------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I wrote: # I suppose that a site that escapes detection as a Mixmaster will throw off # the correlation stats (i.e. because a message from that site to B won't be # identified as a remailed message). But such sites are elusive objects I # think. On the one hand, the site can't endure for long, or else its # throughput traffic will likely give it away as an anonymizer (i.e. it gets # lots of mail from the Mix network, and sends out similar amounts of mail to # all sorts of people and the network). On the other hand, it had better last, # or else it will look suspicious as a transient account receiving mail from # the Mix network, sending a few messages, and quickly vanishing. Lance writes:
The second paragraph seems to deal with the issue of being known as an anonymous remailer or regular remailer user. I am not sure exactly what the concern with that is.
I was trying to explore possible ways to beat TA with less bandwidth, in the context of transient (w.r.t. network address) anonymizers. I indicated doubt about the possibility of any real gain, and as I think about it more I'm not able to convince myself that there's any real value at all in that regard. Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com> - "IBM ?" Go Colts ! - "All the girls are doing it" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMPBbEynaAKQPVHDZAQGm7wf+LbaZeZqI8/qwBQi+6vS4bzvtSkdf9i1v aD8I0jlNLAmFsPQ6dJ0mOBObPz8b+3PbJ1/TCyr5w0vWcb6XpEemblqNf1H+SdY+ nP6Xbmdoyie2cObGjYOz8HHvhg+qANnanIqtax/CPd9smPMcLnl20pyLJPhlFRPG MUQX33yIrxXEGY0os725Q1lQDWHaMpbt65+quzVZYFAfaNzBzQ99vy4ZrzsBPZIK GLiqPcygWt3Kxfk7O0WjI2Gic3nrrpP1X5SxWwFnGQmlm9Zd9FwJxhpLsW4s+0B0 CNAI8c1ASA9AebLVVYVP4riQRkVDK/BYYSJLcXQfp2TzDSgPXg32JQ== =coNU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (2)
-
futplex@pseudonym.com -
loki@obscura.com