Reordering, not Latency (Was: Re: Remailer)

[Michael Handler]

On Wed, 25 Jan 1995 Louis Cypher wrote:

> In recent discussions, the consensus 
> was that message reordering was superior to (and the actual intent of) 
> latency.  Reordering is not sufficient, a form of latency is required 
> to make it effective.

	I have literally hundreds of messages archived from the CP list of
several months back where Eric Hughes repeatedly states that reordering,
not latency, is the key. Reordering of a sufficient magnitude will
introduce latency inherently. Otherwise you are still vulnerable to 
traffic analysis (which is an art, not a science, remember).

--
Michael Handler                                         <grendel at netaxs.com>
Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics                   Philadelphia, PA
"Toi qui fais au proscrit ce regard calme et haut" -- Baudelaire * Skotoseme
PGP Key ID FC031321  Print: 9B DB 9A B0 1B 0D 56 DA  61 6A 57 AD B2 4C 7B AF