[8546] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: This is what happens to you if you send a message to com-priv I guess
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Craig Partridge)
Mon Nov 22 12:46:56 1993
To: Stephen Williams <sdw@meaddata.com>
Cc: perry@stars.reston.paramax.com, farber@central.cis.upenn.edu,
In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 22 Nov 93 11:20:48 -0500.
From: Craig Partridge <craig@aland.bbn.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 09:39:26 -0800
Only the maintainer has access to names on the system, which he
commits to never being divulged (usually excepting police warrants).
The whole point is that it is anonymous. Stop whining that you are
'not to be monitored'... In this case it was a simple mistake anyway,
as has already been explained.
Yes it is a mistake. And most of us who are complaining are folks who
believe that an anonymous service has some important benefits. We're
just distressed that we can so easily be co opted into the anonymous system.
The anonymous system is not so benign as it seems. My understanding of
the system (and I'm still learning) is that now that I have an anonymous
ID (which I don't want), e-mail from me through the system will be rewritten
with my anonymous ID as the sender. However, it doesn't rewrite the text --
my signature line is retained. Thus, if by some chance (and such chances
have happened to me more than once in my many years on the net), a piece
of e-mail from me goes via penet.fi, it will pop into someone's mailbox with
an anonymous ID as the source address and my name at the bottom, thus
advertising to everyone that I have an (unwanted) anonymous account.
Inevitably, some folks will start wondering why I have an anonymous account.
I could do without wasting time explaining to everyone who asks that it was
a technical glitch and not that I wanted to post to some outre list (which
I think was what Dennis was pointing out).
>From a more pragmatic point of view, I'm periodically involved in technical
politics (standards activities, nominations committees, etc.). This is an
arena that places a premium on folks being discrete. Many technical forums
also prefer folks to be open about their views. An anonymous account suggests
the owner of the account (a) has a vehicle for anonymous leaks [bad news]
and (b) is being covert about something [also bad news]. So having an
unwanted anonymous account for me is not an asset, nor benign (because I
might accidentally expose it), but rather a liability.
Craig
craig@bbn.com
