CDR: Re: -C-P- Re: would it be so much to ask..

[Tim May]

(P.S. Lose the toad.com address. Get a clue. Or, since you appear to 
be a luser, "loose the toad.com address.")


At 8:04 AM -0400 9/19/00, Asymmetric wrote:
>At 10:54 09/19/2000 +0200, harald at f00.nu wrote:
>>At 17:08 2000-09-18 -0400, you wrote:
>>>That the list be changed so that unregistered email addresses 
>>>cannot send messages to it?  This spam is getting ridiculous.
>>
>>I suppose you know why we don´t have that (the remailing issue). 
>>But I kinda have another idea. Just start every subject line with 
>>eg -C-P- like I did now, then it would be really easy to filter all 
>>the mail.
>
>Last I checked the remailers allowed return mail to be sent through 
>them, to the owner of the anonymous account.. isn't that the point? 
>It's easy enough to forge the email header that I can't believe they 
>exist just to totally isolate anyone from the responses.. how would 
>someone using a remailer even join the list (to receive messages) if 
>that was the point?

And how many anonymously-remailed messages to this list have ever, in 
all the years of this list, included reply blocks? No more than a 
small handful, as I recall seeing.

"the remailers allowed return mail" is terribly misleading, and 
probably arises out of ignorance of what reply blocks are and why 
they are so difficult to use, rather than imprecision in language.

As for "I can't believe they exist just to totally isolate...", with 
your claim that forging headers is apparently a good alternative, you 
are naive and ignorant.

Do you think that the anonymous poster who posted the RC4 code here 
several years ago should simply have done some kind of Port 25 hack 
instead of using a remailer?

Do you think that the folks who distributed the CoS NOTS files should 
have used header forgings instead of using Cypherpunks remailers? (As 
the educated amongst you know, the CoS efforts to force Julf to 
disclose the mapping ultimately failed to produce the source when 
Julf's mapping only pointed back to a Cypherpunks-type remailer being 
run at that time by C2Net.)

>
>What about just creating another list (closed-posting) and then just 
>allowing people to choose which to subscribe to?  Obviously, the 
>open-posting list would be subscribed to the closed posting list, 
>but not the other way around.. so at the risk of missing the 
>massively important anonymous message that has yet to be sent, I 
>could eliminate some of this spam?

If you don't get it, you have no business trying to architect the 
structure of our list.

--Tim May

-- 
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES:   831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
"Cyphernomicon"             | black markets, collapse of governments.