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

Re: Remailer Abuse


Jonathan replied:

> One thing to keep in mind, though, is that it's really the _last_ remailer
> in the chain that's taking the most heat, and it would be nice if they got
> payed.

Unfortunately, this creates the closest association between specific
traffic and paying customers.

>  There's also an issue of some remailers refusing to be last in the
> chain, so they dont' expose themselves so much. So the remailers which
> _did_ agree to be last in the chain would obviously get used for this
> purpose, while the others wouldn't, but they wouldn't get any more money
> for it.

What's to prevent mail from remailer A sent to remailer B from being
sent right back to A for delivery? That's a part of the mixing required
for true randomness. I don't know if this is being done now (by Chain or
premail), and I'd like to know why. There might well be a good reason I'm
not aware of. In order to join the mesh, remailers would be required
to accept and ultimately deliver mail to ensure equality among them.

I believe that a class of "prime" remailers would arise; these would be
the preferred remailers, and their input and output would largely be
balanced. This assumes, of course, that "second-class" remailers (those
which profit equally but don't deliver as the last unit in the chain)
aren't allowed in on a equal basis. Prime operators deserve, and would
receive, compensation.

> They might even get less, since most people probably don't use the
> same remailer twice in a chain, so the ones agreeing to be last are hardly
> ever going to be first.   That seems undesirable.

See above. What's the difference between A-->B-->C-->B and A-->B-->C-->D ?
If someone is logging messages and routing, it's less secure, but then so is
the entire remailer system. Prime remailer operators are those who don't

Maybe message size would tip off snoopers. This can be overcome with minor
tweaking to existing remailer code by tacking on or or eliminating padding
to messages. But logging still makes the whole system extremely vulnerable.

> remailers, since that poses even more exposure to heat, and it would be
> nice if ops were conpensated for.

Agreed. But since the payment "on the way out" (i.e.; a store) is much
less desirable (and would probably work to reduce traffic), payment "on the 
way in" (i.e.; the subway) seems like the preferred alternative.

=D.C. Williams	<[email protected]>

- ---
[This message has been signed by an auto-signing service.  A valid signature
means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the
signature and forwarded.]

Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Gratis auto-signing service