StealthMonger wrote: > No. Ever hear of Chaum's "Dining Cryptographers" [1]? Anonymity > right there at the table. Been around for almost twenty years. > Strong anonymity is available today using chains of random-latency, > mixing, anonymizing remailers based on mixmaster [2], of which there > is a thriving worldwide network [3].
You're, er, missing the point entirely. The system Jerry posted about relies on sniffing traffic of commonly used services to passively gather layer 8 information. The vast majority of regular computer users had, and largely still have, an expectation of privacy from their use of these standard, non-encrypted services such as plain e-mail and IM; it's *this* privacy that I said never existed, except in the minds of uneducated users. This is also why there's no "piercing of anonymity" going on -- there's no anonymity to pierce! If Jerry's system had the ability to, say, perform attacks on Tor and similar systems to gather data, then one could argue for piercing anonymity as an accurate description. -- Ivan Krstic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | GPG: 0x147C722D --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
