On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote:
Still useful to protect against third party eavesdroppers, I guess.
Could it be at least somehow useful as a part of some bigger scheme, a
layer of a cake? Can a distributed multilayered proxy be built with some
less-than-trusted components?
Short
At 10:39 PM 8/21/2003 +0200, Thomas Shaddack wrote:
However, perhaps the JAP team at TU Dresden hadn't much choice. I
haven't seen the court order, but I could imagine that they weren't
allowed to inform the users because it would have harmed the criminal
investigation. Following the order
It would be easy for me to say that all of the operators connected with JPE
Maybe this is the place to post their names, for posterity.
This from cryptography mailing list
(URL corrected from orig):
Some people on this list may be interested in
http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/d.f.j.wood/thesis_index.htm
(Note: I haven't read more than Chapter 1.)
Yet more info. Let's not overreact before we get complete dataset.
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 09:34:27 +0200
Subject: Re: Popular Net anonymity service back-doored
From: nordi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thursday, 21. August
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Thomas Shaddack wrote:
Yet more info. Let's not overreact before we get complete dataset.
It is worth noting that the notice mentioned below was placed on the JAP
website only after the news of the back channel was made public on Usenet
and the various security mailing
