CDR: Re: Would it be so much to ask...

[Anonymous]

On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Riad S. Wahby wrote:

> Asymmetric <all at biosys.net> wrote:
> > As for my being naive as you claim in a second here, who is really being
> > naive here?  You think that just because the remailer doesn't maintain an
> > active database of nym mappings that it's immdiately impossible for it to
> > be reversed?  You implicitly trust anyone who says "here, use my remailer,
> > I guarantee it's anonymous?"  Get with the program.  One fucking line on a
> > console, in a firewall rule, anywhere along the way could fuck you into   
> > losing your anonymity, unless the message was sent encrypted to the
> > remailer, and that's just to start with.
> 
> You should read up on Type 1 and Type 2 remailers.  Both involve
> encryption.  In the case of Type 2 remailers, you only need to trust
> one in the chain that you use in order to be sure that your identity
> is securely hidden.
  
That's not even 100% correct. If you are chaining, and the first server in
the chain is evil, all that the admin can tell is that you are using a    
remailer. The content of the message, and the final recipient, are not    
known. (A good case for generating random cover traffic...)


-S.R.