At 11:05 AM 9/2/96 -0700, Tim wrote:

No, the focus was at _least_ as much on providing anonymity as on protection from eavesdroppers or traffic analysts. More so, actually. How do I know this? Well, I was the one who did the presentation on Chaumian mixes at the first meeting, describing them as remailers and using paper envelopes-within-envelopes to illustrate the concept. Later that day, in the "Crypto Anarchy Game" we played to educate the

Thanks for the history correction; I got involved with Cypherpunks about a year after the initial meeting/game, so I'm going on other people's comments about the intent of mixes and remailers. Out of curiousity, did either spam or blackmail show up during the first run of the game?

And all of the early uses were explicitly to anonymize the sender, not to deter eavesdropping (which conventional crypto works well for, anyway).

Keeping the sender's identity hidden from the recipient is a different problem than keeping either of them hidden from Untrusted Third Parties. Conventional crypto is fine for keeping message content secure from eavedroppers, but isn't enough to prevent traffic analysis; that requires either mixes or at least message pools or broadcasts.

Kleinpaste .... Julf .... I've also been pleased by how long Julf's remailer stayed in business.

# Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts@ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> # You can get PGP software outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto