[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: WWW proxies?

To: "Mark M." <[email protected]>, Cypherpunks <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: WWW proxies?
From: [email protected] (Lucky Green)
Date: Sun, 5 May 1996 18:16:35 -0700
Sender: [email protected]

At 14:37 5/5/96, Mark M. wrote:

>The same is also true for cpunk and penet-style remailers that do not use
>encryption.  You always have to trust remailer operators regardless of whether
>encryption is used or not.

You have to trust *one* of the remailer operators in the chain. If there is
no chain, you have to trust the sole remailer's ISP as well.

>The situation will become much better when there
>is some way to chain proxies and encrypt to each individual proxy.

That's why we need PipeNet.

Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer.

-- Lucky Green <mailto:[email protected]>
   PGP encrypted mail preferred.

Prev by Date: FW: Why I Pay Too Much in Taxes
Next by Date: Re: Why I Pay Too Much in Taxes
Prev by thread: Re: WWW proxies?
Next by thread: Re: WWW proxies?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread