| Deuxpi Admin 2006-12-01, 7:14 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
>
> What does a remailer have to do to be abuse-resistant? It looks like
> twisty and thrasher weren't abuse-reisistant enough, and neither was the
> George Orwell remailer.
>
> My guess is it would have to do with filtering, but it seems there are
> legal limits to what kind of filtering can be done, so I'd like to know
> about this abuse-resistant thing.
You probably know that many remailers come and go because their ISPs shut them
down. These events are certainly not as spectacular than when a well-known
remailer disappears for legal reasons. What I meant by "abuse-resistant" is that
some remailers are reliable and in good terms with their network connection
providers about dealing with abuse and these remailers are probably there to stay.
I agree that trying to block messages by filtering can evolve into censorship.
Even if we dismiss the legal aspects, filtering opens the door to a new form of
abuse by trying to get legitimate messages blocked.
- - --
Deuxpi Admin <deuxpi-admin@deuxpi.ca>
http://www.deuxpi.ca/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFcMlMzQ0RLMqB8s4RAvQSAJ4v3M2vBFBL
t89OSaKXEJqkU/zX4QCfVd60
xu29t35dDx9KFnrAnUpWKug=
=M3cT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|