Anonymous Servers - Serious Abuse of Remailer

Author

Serious Abuse of Remailer

lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org

2006-10-28, 1:17 pm

Let's assume you get back an autoreply mail forwarding you an email which went originally through your remailer and was sent back to you because the receiver had an autoresponder activated.
The content of the mail having been sent and bouncing back to your remailer is a bomb threat.
How would you remops handle such a situtation ?

Thomas J. Boschloo

2006-10-28, 1:17 pm

lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org

2006-10-28, 1:17 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org schreef:
> Let's assume you get back an autoreply mail forwarding you an email which went originally through your remailer and was sent back to you because the receiver had an autoresponder activated.
> The content of the mail having been sent and bouncing back to your remailer is a bomb threat.
> How would you remops handle such a situtation ?

Three questions:
1) Do you allow custom from headers at your exit?
2) Will the bomb explode with your remailer's latency and uptime taken
into account?
3) Does the bombing note say something among the lines of "I HATE
REMAILERS AND IF YOU DON'T TRACE ME I WILL BLAST YOU AND YOUR FRIENDS
INTO LITTLE TINY PIECES AND THEN JUMP ON THEM UNTIL YOU HAVE HAD ENOUGH!"

Do you give in to such demands? If you do you shouldn't be a remop
IMNSHO. You do the traffic part. Not the content of that traffic. You
got the bomb threat to the recipient, thus you have done your job. It is
not like you send armed nuclear warheads or sharp exploding pencils
through your remailer (like the postal services could). We don't need
starwars to defend our mailboxes from someones radioactive tirades. And
the drugs always get to the user. Even in prison. Remember that well.
There is no place on earth that is safe from terror. With or without
remailers.

hi,
Thomas
- --
George W. Bush lets us know he would let Dick Cheney torture anyone to
learn about new terror plots. But demand generates supply!
So in order to torture more we need to get more people to dislike and
attack America. I can tell this is a winning strategy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6093298.stm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBRUNxJQEP2l8iXKAJAQG5iwMdGYC5AdC6
Hps3ZX+rx+mQEz8c7/VHosIx
WGsIpHbXF44Lx+B2URxD4zj4Sj66D8qsfWOhB/zJzHrzWik8eCPTbnBIW10i3+pc
uPp7j1YSYPAzH6Pr/LS8bdi/vvMvnzQkvYCyIw==
=w5/J
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

The bomb threat was sent to the US airport of the City of Columbia Missouri and the email had the following text which bounced back to the remailer due to the autoresponder:

Subject: Re: Warning (Absence from the office)

Autoresponder reply which went back to the remailers bounce email address:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will be out of the office on Friday, October 27, and returning Monday, October 30, 2006. If you need assistance before I return, feel free to contact the airport administration office at Ph# 573-442-9770.

________________________________________
____________________

Original bomb threat message sent to KAF@GoColumbiaMO.com:
----------------------------------------------------------

Tell ZOG police-

A BOMB AT THE COLUMBIA REGIONAL AIRPORT IS SET TO EXPLODE AT A FIXED TIME.

IT ALSO HAS AN AH DEVICE ON A 2ND CIRCUIT.

________________________________________
_________

The problem is that the person to which the bomb threat was sent through the remailer obviously is out of the office. That means nobody could react on it, if this is a real threat and not a fake one. What if it is a real threat and the bomb explodes somet
imes and a lot of innocent people die or will be injured ?

Thomas J. Boschloo

2006-10-28, 1:17 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org schreef:
>
> The bomb threat was sent to the US airport of the City of Columbia Missouri and the email had the following text which bounced back to the remailer due to the autoresponder:
>
> Subject: Re: Warning (Absence from the office)
>
>
> Autoresponder reply which went back to the remailers bounce email address:
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I will be out of the office on Friday, October 27, and returning Monday, October 30, 2006. If you need assistance before I return, feel free to contact the airport administration office at Ph# 573-442-9770.

Well, let's hope the bomb doesn't explode until Monday then. There is
not a lot you can do but call them and ask them if they want the message.

> ________________________________________
____________________
>
>
> Original bomb threat message sent to KAF@GoColumbiaMO.com:
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Tell ZOG police-
>
>
>
> A BOMB AT THE COLUMBIA REGIONAL AIRPORT IS SET TO EXPLODE AT A FIXED TIME.
>
>
>
> IT ALSO HAS AN AH DEVICE ON A 2ND CIRCUIT.
>
> ________________________________________
_________
>
>
> The problem is that the person to which the bomb threat was sent through the remailer obviously is out of the office. That means nobody could react on it, if this is a real threat and not a fake one. What if it is a real threat and the bomb explodes som
etimes and a lot of innocent people die or will be injured ?

It is not your problem. By reading this message it has become your
problem, but when talking about remailers it is the problem of the
sender and the receiver not taking into account every possibility. If
you are lucky the bomber will read this message and defuse his bomb. Or
the US airport security guys are smart enough to scan all incoming mail
for threats and forward them to a special 24/7 terror alert department.
Again, it is not a normal thing a remop should worry about.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Frog-Admin would have made sure the e-mail was delivered to 'KAF', even
if he had to ride there by bicycle. A remop like Alex de Joode would
have missed the message to this group because the term 'dizum' was not
in the header. Panta Rhei would go down because of a power failure and
deliver the message too late. Eelbash Admin would have monitored and
mangled the message and be in the problem you are in now.

Thomas
- --
George W. Bush lets us know he would let Dick Cheney torture anyone to
learn about new terror plots. But demand generates supply!
So in order to torture more we need to get more people to dislike and
attack America. I can tell this is a winning strategy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6093298.stm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBRUOAKQEP2l8iXKAJAQEW9AMfUP5Ic4rN
8zv4OMSIFxoOc9KflIdF0o4m
ixv/ vp9GqZXzqLNICHRYLUf8HvcSYlOyfxJijYs7CJZn
fIwrQU3BP8Yw4tyMPKCX
4r8HLpcotj1kidzCtO9fVyPBOwlWGO7QAiWz1Q==

=Z3D0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org

2006-10-28, 1:17 pm

<<<snip>>>

It is not your problem. By reading this message it has become your
problem, but when talking about remailers it is the problem of the
sender and the receiver not taking into account Svery possibility. If
you are lucky the bomber will read this message and defuse his bomb. Or
the US airport security guys are smart enough to scan all incoming mail
for threats and forward them to a special 24/7 terror alert department.
Again, it is not a normal thing a remop should worry about.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Frog-Admin would have made sure the e-mail was delivered to 'KAF', even
if he had to ride there by bicycle.

==> This is not a choice, it might be to late.

A remop like Alex de Joode would
have missed the message to this group because the term 'dizum' was not
in the header. Panta Rhei would go down because of a power failure and
deliver the message too late.

==> this is not a choice because the meassage was already sent

Eelbash Admin would have monitored and
mangled the message and be in the problem you are in now.

==> I have not monitored in the way eelbash is doing. As explained the mail bounced back to due to the fact that the receiver had an autoresponder on. Since the sender address was the remailer sender email address it bounced back to it. In normal circumst
ances bounce backs are due to several kinds of delivery failures which give a remops very good hints in case something goes wrong in the remailer network. To ensure best possible delivery of mails send out by the remailer it can be quite helpful to look a
t the bounce backs. It is an exception that something bounces back due to autoreply which was the case here.
So I came across this mail not by a regulary systematic scanning like eelbash is doing but by accident going throgh the bounces. I like to make that very clear because I do not support the systematic scanning eelbash seems to do. I am not interested in th
e content going through my remailer apart from the fact that I was looking at bounce backs to see if something goes wrong in the remailer network. This is quite useful and shortens the time to react on problems.

==> Now the question remains, should a remop stumbling accross such a serious (in case it real and not fake) bomb threat ignore it ? May be somebody in US could give the police a call before it is too late (in case of real threat) ??? As you all lnow ther
e is no way to identify the real sender of this bomb threat because the mail went through the remailer network but at least such a call could avoid may be that innocent people die or will be injured. Nobody can judge whether it is a real threat but would
it be right to lay back and ignore taking the risk that something serious could happen which could have been may be avoided ? Let's just keep in mind that human beings might be in danger and a call at the City of Columbia Police might avoid a desaster. Or
shall we just say we are just the postman of the bad message but we do not take action because we are not responsible for content.

Thomas
- --
George W. Bush lets us know he would let Dick Cheney torture anyone to
learn about new terror plots. But demand generates supply!
So in order to torture more we need to get more people to dislike and
attack America. I can tell this is a winning strategy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6093298.stm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBRUOAKQEP2l8iXKAJAQEW9AMfUP5Ic4rN
8zv4OMSIFxoOc9KflIdF0o4m
ixv/ vp9GqZXzqLNICHRYLUf8HvcSYlOyfxJijYs7CJZn
fIwrQU3BP8Yw4tyMPKCX
4r8HLpcotj1kidzCtO9fVyPBOwlWGO7QAiWz1Q==

=Z3D0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Anonymous

2006-10-28, 7:14 pm

lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org wrote:

> Let's assume you get back an autoreply mail forwarding you an email which
> went originally through your remailer and was sent back to you because
> the receiver had an autoresponder activated. The content of the mail
> having been sent and bouncing back to your remailer is a bomb threat. How
> would you remops handle such a situtation ?

Simple: The remailer sends an autoreply or drops the message if it has sent
one before. Remops don't read bounces.

Nomen Nescio

2006-10-28, 7:14 pm

"lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org" <lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org> wrote:

> ==> Now the question remains, should a remop stumbling accross such a
> serious (in case it real and not fake) bomb threat ignore it ?

Yes.

1. It's most probably faked
2. Airport security should find each and every bomb before it comes into
critical range. What do you think they got all the spending and laws
for?
3. The airport should have made sure that mail is read by someone even if
the original recipient is on vacation.
4. The remop should not have stumbled across this message in the first
place.

Lay back. If you manage not to give up within the first half year, the
amount of abuse decreases to a level of one or two complaint waves every
few months.

Redwood

2006-10-29, 1:14 am

"lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org"
<lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org> wrote in
news:638841796638538.Post@ithinknot.net:

> <<<snip>>>
>
> It is not your problem. By reading this message it has become
> your problem, but when talking about remailers it is the problem
> of the sender and the receiver not taking into account Svery
> possibility. If
> you are lucky the bomber will read this message and defuse his
> bomb. Or
> the US airport security guys are smart enough to scan all
> incoming mail for threats and forward them to a special 24/7
> terror alert department. Again, it is not a normal thing a remop
> should worry about.
>
> Don't shoot the messenger.
>
> Frog-Admin would have made sure the e-mail was delivered to
> 'KAF', even if he had to ride there by bicycle.
>
> ==> This is not a choice, it might be to late.
>
> A remop like Alex de Joode would
> have missed the message to this group because the term 'dizum'
> was not in the header. Panta Rhei would go down because of a
> power failure and deliver the message too late.
>
> ==> this is not a choice because the meassage was already sent
>
> Eelbash Admin would have monitored and
> mangled the message and be in the problem you are in now.
>
> ==> I have not monitored in the way eelbash is doing. As
> explained the mail bounced back to due to the fact that the
> receiver had an autoresponder on. Since the sender address was
> the remailer sender email address it bounced back to it. In
> normal circumstances bounce backs are due to several kinds of
> delivery failures which give a remops very good hints in case
> something goes wrong in the remailer network. To ensure best
> possible delivery of mails send out by the remailer it can be
> quite helpful to look at the bounce backs. It is an exception
> that something bounces back due to autoreply which was the case
> here. So I came across this mail not by a regulary systematic
> scanning like eelbash is doing but by accident going throgh the
> bounces. I like to make that very clear because I do not support
> the systematic scanning eelbash seems to do. I am not interested
> in the content going through my remailer apart from the fact
> that I was looking at bounce backs to see if something goes
> wrong in the remailer network. This is quite useful and shortens
> the time to react on problems.
>
> ==> Now the question remains, should a remop stumbling accross
> such a serious (in case it real and not fake) bomb threat ignore
> it ? May be somebody in US could give the police a call before
> it is too late (in case of real threat) ??? As you all lnow
> there is no way to identify the real sender of this bomb threat
> because the mail went through the remailer network but at least
> such a call could avoid may be that innocent people die or will
> be injured. Nobody can judge whether it is a real threat but
> would it be right to lay back and ignore taking the risk that
> something serious could happen which could have been may be
> avoided ? Let's just keep in mind that human beings might be in
> danger and a call at the City of Columbia Police might avoid a
> desaster. Or shall we just say we are just the postman of the
> bad message but we do not take action because we are not
> responsible for content.
>

It does not matter. You will be contacted about it and probably
have your machine seized. That message was delivered, the bounce
is a vacation autoreply, which means "I received your message but
won't be around to read it until I return". So it will be read, it
will be reported, and they will investigate.

Anonymous

2006-10-29, 7:12 am

Redwood <anon@comments.header> wrote:

> It does not matter. You will be contacted about it and probably
> have your machine seized.

The FBI and CIA know how remailers work and that seizing a machine costs
much and gains nothing.

Alex de Joode

2006-10-29, 1:12 pm

Anonymous <nobody@mixmin.net> wrote:
: lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org wrote:

: > Let's assume you get back an autoreply mail forwarding you an email which
: > went originally through your remailer and was sent back to you because
: > the receiver had an autoresponder activated. The content of the mail
: > having been sent and bouncing back to your remailer is a bomb threat. How
: > would you remops handle such a situtation ?

: Simple: The remailer sends an autoreply or drops the message if it has sent
: one before. Remops don't read bounces.

I'm a bit at a loss here.

Dizum is configured to have all mail sent out as 'nobody@dizum.com', all
incomming mail sent to nobody@dizum.com is collected by mrss Dev & Null.

I see absolutely no reason to read mail or to fix user problems, other
then those due to my system malfunctioning. The system is there, it can
be used, it can be abused, it may work or it may not work. There should be
a best effort by the remop to have the system work 'as advertised'. Doing
more might land you in the hot zone....

Cheers,
-AJ-

Twisty Creek Admin

2006-10-29, 7:13 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 15:51:13 +0000 (UTC), adejoode+usenet@sabotage.org
(Alex de Joode) wrote:

>Anonymous <nobody@mixmin.net> wrote:
>: lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org wrote:
>
>: > Let's assume you get back an autoreply mail forwarding you an email
>which : > went originally through your remailer and was sent back to you
>because : > the receiver had an autoresponder activated. The content of
>the mail
>: > having been sent and bouncing back to your remailer is a bomb threat.
>How : > would you remops handle such a situtation ?
>
>: Simple: The remailer sends an autoreply or drops the message if it has
>sent : one before. Remops don't read bounces.
>
>I'm a bit at a loss here.
>
>Dizum is configured to have all mail sent out as 'nobody@dizum.com', all
>incomming mail sent to nobody@dizum.com is collected by mrss Dev & Null.
>
>I see absolutely no reason to read mail or to fix user problems, other
>then those due to my system malfunctioning. The system is there, it can
>be used, it can be abused, it may work or it may not work. There should be
>a best effort by the remop to have the system work 'as advertised'. Doing
>more might land you in the hot zone....
>
>Cheers,
>-AJ-

I have my mail client filters set up to delete all bounces. Who cares? From
this AM when I last wrote, 37 messages have been received to my admin
address, only 3 made it through (spam

. Do you have have any idea how
many bounces I would get when another re-mailer is down for an extended
period? The re-mailer is set up to try to deliver a message for 3 days. If
it goes beyond that, it bounces. As for malformed PGP or Mix, I also just
simply delete any messages that PGP or Mix can't decrypt. Messages where
the sender has sent to multiple addresses and uses a . instead of a , to
seperate them or whatever other problems are encountered in the message
format are also summarily deleted. Anything that the re-mailer can't
process is secure deleted using the Gutman process. It is not my
reponsibility to try to fix someone's mistake. I don't have time and don't
like the idea, period. The less I know, the better.

I did have a case once where the sender would send to a specified address
and then resend back to me. Sort of like a chain. It was a commercial
mortgage company. I simply blocked that mortgage company name in Reliable
and the circular chain ended. I think that was what started this thread. No
big deal. Only once in over a year isn't bad odds for something that I
would not worry about. Kind of like a straw dog. Too many "what ifs". I
just don't see it. I believe, I am second in message load to Panta in
messages per week. I don't see any real problems. If I did, I would be
hearing about them from someone.

Alex is 100% correct as always. I follow the same. Not my responsibility to
fix user errors.

Nearly every user of the services is 100% honest. I can't say I have
problems, I don't.

Regards to all,
Twisty Creek Admin

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQA/ AwUBRUUMgv9qPDhkRaWyEQLYgQCghA2jE2JgjwcA
x2/cbsCUPCgu2fsAoLau
eAAf1B0MmG7Txhz+KQmuaNW3
=qNTz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Thomas J. Boschloo

2006-10-29, 7:13 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org schreef:
[snip]
> May be somebody in US could give the police a call before it is too
> late (in case of real threat) ???

And overload the airport official for terror (and his team) so noone can
get trough in case something really happens?

> As you all lnow there is no way to identify the real sender of this
> bomb threat because the mail went through the remailer network but
> at least such a call could avoid may be that innocent people die or
> will be injured.

Let's assume you call and avert and human tragedy. The newspapers will
applaud you for calling the police based on the remailer message that
bounced back to your from an autoresponder. How do you think this will
affect a future terrorist that has read this message? That new terrorist
might figure out all by himself that if he uses your remailer you will
make sure his message makes it. Does that sound plausible to you?

I am not trained to judge the seriousness of a bomb threat. I doubt you
are better trained than me. What is more, I don't get paid for this and
don't want to get in trouble because of pretending that I do know what I
am talking about.

> Nobody can judge whether it is a real threat but would it be right
> to lay back and ignore taking the risk that something serious could
> happen which could have been may be avoided ?

I think North Korea is going to try to drop a nuke on Japan within a
year. Should I go call the White House?

> Let's just keep in
> mind that human beings might be in danger and a call at the City of
> Columbia Police might avoid a desaster. Or shall we just say we are
> just the postman of the bad message but we do not take action
> because we are not responsible for content.

Exactly. Would you like a postal worker to open all mail to the prime
minister of the country where you life and warn him is something
terribly bad is going to happen? No. You want:
1) The message to arrive
2) No delay other than needed for anonimity
3) The message to arrive without data corruption
4) Noone other than the intended recipient and the sender to know the
contents of the message

It is not that hard,
Thomas
- --
Truth is the first casualty of war
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBRUUSdgEP2l8iXKAJAQFZBAMeMqf2fUTF
Fq97iowQtmZRbOpm9Fz2YqvM
qJ/gFVwF6idf+ZNJkgQeV7rv/emRmCdfZx8I+q+lwxEQkwGqimAkgDMxokWiJ/f2
sz2Vuj/aON0ZxpYbB/0VvSvursPA9pRzdPdxDg==
=+h0s
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Macarro

2006-10-30, 1:13 pm

> Let's assume you get back an autoreply mail forwarding you an email
> which went originally through your remailer and was sent back to you
> because the receiver had an autoresponder activated.
> The content of the mail having been sent and bouncing back to your
> remailer is a bomb threat. How would you remops handle such a situtation
> ?

Let's assume you work for a telecoms company and overheard two people
talking about placing a bomb a the airport but you are not sure if they are
joking or it is serious, should you call the police? Can you risk the death
of hundreds of people?

What about not listening to private conversations in the first place?

I only see one risk, the risk that somebody confiscates your servers, I
believe
that has happened to an operator already, most people assume the police
know how remailers work, but I am not that confident about their skills.
And they
may always decide to confiscate them anyway so you get bothered and stop
providing the service, but when you become a remailer operator you know
that
can happen it is happened before it can happen again, if its too much for
you
to take then I would not take the risk and then cry.
--

Mapping the Internet 24/7: http://www.netdimes.org

Anonymous via Panta Rhei

2006-10-30, 7:15 pm

In article <993873581454414.Post@ithinknot.net>
lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org wrote:
>
> Let's assume you get back an autoreply mail forwarding you an email which went originally through your remailer and was sent back to you because the receiver had an autoresponder activated.
> The content of the mail having been sent and bouncing back to your remailer is a bomb threat.
> How would you remops handle such a situtation ?

The general attitude of the replies to this enquiry is that you
shouldn't have read the message in the first place.

I am very inclined to agree with that sentiment. When one sends
mail to a machine (remailer) one doesn't necessarily expect (or
even WANT) a reply from a human being.

By the way, please state what remailer you run so that I can be
sure to never use it as an exit.
I don't like the idea that some remop (i.e. eelbash) might
"accidentally" read my message.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
for abuse and hashcash info.

Fritz Wuehler

2006-10-30, 7:15 pm

On Sat., 28-Oct-2006, at 11:06:17pm GMT,
LookingForAdvise@UrgentQuestions.ORG wrote: ^^^^^^
Message-ID: <3f2ce5426be6d70905bfeef5a0660f32@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>

First of all, the word to use in this context is "advice". "To Advise"
is a VERB. "Advice" is the ADJECTIVE.

Now:

:> Let's assume you get back an autoreply mail forwarding you an email
:> which went originally through your remailer and was sent back to you
:> because the receiver had an autoresponder activated. The content of
:> the mail having been sent and bouncing back to your remailer is a
:> bomb threat. How would you remops handle such a situtation ?

> Simple: The remailer sends an autoreply or drops the message if it
> has sent one before. Remops don't read bounces.

I'll add to that: Remops don't read E-Mails, PERIOD.

The only conceivable reason for even ASKING this question in the first
place is that you have been monitoring people's E-Mail, for that is the
ONLY way in which this situation could ever arise.

Kindly CEASE your monitoring!

Not only is this EXTREMELY offensive, and contrary to the very purpose
for which anonymous remailers were created in the first place, but,
beyond that -- as you have discovered -- such monitoring opens the
remop to untenable ethical AND legal entanglements such as the one
outlined above.

While it is not impossible, it is certainly difficult, to hold one
liable for illegal activity of which one is completely ignorant.

On the other hand, poking one's nose into places where it doesn't
belong -- so that one in fact DOES learn of the illegal activity
-- is the easiest, the fastest, and the surest method I know of
for one to acquire a liability one would otherwise never possess.

Anonymous

2006-10-31, 7:12 am

In article <ei75f7$5hi$1@bananasplit.info>, admin@bananasplit.info
says...

|Some kind of template explaining remailers; what they do and how they
|work, written in legalese would be a useful thing.

Someone could ask the EFF http://www.eff.org/ to write one. They wrote a
response template for Tor node maintainers to ISP's
http://tor.eff.org/eff/tor-dmca-response.html.en They could and probably
would do the same thing for remailers for law enforcement.

Thomas J. Boschloo

2006-10-31, 1:12 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Zax schreef:
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 22:10:20 +0100, Fritz Wuehler wrote in
> Message-Id: <E1GeeOi-0007Xp-Lm@frell.theremailer.net>:
>
>
> I completely agree, but we do have a problem at the moment. Various
> exit operators appear to be getting contacted by US Law Enforcement with
> regard to bomb threats being sent to airport authorities.

Oh my, imitation crime. Those bombers must have gotten really active
after seeing the 'lookingforadvise@urgentquestions.org' message to this
group. Damn, the bombers are on to us! Now they will explode every plane
in the nation! If only those damned remops had stopped providing these
'remailer' services we could have saved thousands of innocent lives! But
it is not to late, let's pass this legislation and put all these so
called 'remailer operators' behind bars where they can do no further harm!

'I am only doing my job you know'
Thomas
- --
Someone according to Willem F. de Jonge: "There are depths."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQB5AwUBRUdhUAEP2l8iXKAJAQF0egMfaoAj85eB
HmU4Auoy1XFBMcnajAgAwXZr
2MP4KkIL8E2ls7wfPGgybCxnSPLrErcrl2WMlHsG
KOAPMugaQzqaVkETKhqnKWO/
OC3cuYcMfm9EvsvG+qkW8I+bfViN54FPPcWNBQ==

=T867
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----