| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
From: Bass Wastelan <bass@fc.net> To: lmccarth@ducie.cs.umass.edu (L. McCarthy) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 11:28:57 -0600 (CST) Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com In-Reply-To: <199412210047.TAA10557@bb.hks.net> from "L. McCarthy" at Dec 20, 94 07:47:16 pm > someone writes: > $ an anon-http proxy server would probably consume much more in > $ the way of network resources than a remailer, which will > $ likely lead to many being shutdown once discovered by the sysadmins > > That might be somewhat less true on a commercial provider than on an > educational or corporate provider, but in any case a WWW anon-server would be > seen as a much larger potential security hole than a remailer. A couple of > months ago a "friendly" outsider gained unauthorized access to user files > here via our Web server, and reported it to the sysadmins. I would have been > mighty nervous if I'd been offering anon WWW access to the world. I'd be happy to setup a machine at my providers site do run a test of anonymized httpd. From what I understand they wouldn't mind helping either. Within the next 6 months, there probably will be a number of for pay anonymizer services availible on the net. It just makes too much sense for it to not happen.
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |