At 03:00 PM 7/2/2003 -0400, Philip Miller wrote:
In all the discussion of authenticating individual senders rather than the
servers and MTAs they're using, we've all forgotten that there are
circumstances in which anonymity is a requirement. Think of corporate
whistle-blowing situations, in which someone wishes to send an anonymous
message to an entity like a media organization or the SEC. In a world in
which all transmissions are undeniably authenticated to a sender, this
becomes impossible.
Anonymous transmission is indeed a feature of our current systems, not a
bug. Any new system or authentication layer on top of what already exists
needs to maintain that.
One interesting observation that was made that spammer usually do not use
CyberPunk anonymous remailers to send spam or any other kind of anonymous
remailers. There must be a reason for that, perhaps because they see no
need to do so. However, you are definitely right, anonymity is important.
One distinction that can be made perhaps, that a trusted system could be
implemented for bulk email only, thus allowing anyone to send a single
message anonymously once.
The question remains - can a trust system allow for anonymity?
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg