[118434] in Cypherpunks
RE: reader anonymity orthogonal? ((fwd) Re: Cypherspace project)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lucky Green)
Tue Sep 28 00:22:34 1999
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 21:08:27 -0700
From: Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
In-reply-to: <199909272015.VAA09010@server.cypherspace.org>
To: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>, eternity@internexus.net
Cc: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message-id: <NDBBIFGOKODBCKDGJDKLEECKCIAA.shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
IMNSHO, content consumer and content provider anonymity are largely
orthogonal problems. Each of these two problems is exceedingly difficult to
solve individually. I would advise against attempting design a system that
solves both problems simultaneously until we have deployed systems that
solve each problem separately.
For the more recent subscribers: I have been involved with anon IP design
since just about the day the topic was first discussed on Cypherpunks many
years ago. One of my contributions to the field is used in the ZKS Freedom
network. Anon IP, be that sending or receiving, is a *hard* problem. The
longer you look at it, the harder it tends to get. Which is not to say that
the problem is unsolvable.
--Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
> [mailto:owner-cypherpunks@Algebra.COM]On Behalf Of Adam Back
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 1999 13:16
> To: eternity@internexus.net
> Cc: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net; I.Brown@cs.ucl.ac.uk
> Subject: reader anonymity orthogonal? ((fwd) Re: Cypherspace project)
>
>
>
>
> More discussion of design issues -- especially the question of whether
> reader anonymity should be part of an eternity design, or as I was
> arguing a separate privacy vector provided by anonymizer, ZKS/freedom,
> crowds, onion router, lpwa/ProxyMate. (Links for that set on:
> http://www.cypherspace.org/links.html)
>
