CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk

[Jim Choate]

On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote:

> Why not just read the first 20 bytes of the body? If 90% or more aren't
> printable ASCII assume the message is encrypted.

So, how come all of a sudden we're injecting algorithms that the users
must know to even access the network? What sort of regulatory mechanism is
required to mediate changes to the process?

So, we can't send uuencoded text to guard against ASCII-pure (i.e. 7-bit)
machines? Why not? I actualy prefer that sort of stuff because as a last
resort I can check it visualy for errors.

Why not offer a set of services and 'default' or 'best practice'
suggestions, leaving the actual decisions up to the user where it belongs?

A remailer should do NO content checking, ever. It's ONLY job is to route
and destroy traffic analysis.

    ____________________________________________________________________

                     He is able who thinks he is able.

                                           Buddha

       The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
       Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      ravage at ssz.com
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------