I am a very light user of the remailer network, about 10 messages a
month.  My security needs are extreem, i.e. life or death or prision
forever.  I currently use a chain of 20 remailers with stunnel
ephemeral keys through Tor.  Is that adequate for a life or death
situation dealing with a TLA.

My concern is the appearence of new remailers of unknown reputation
or origon; should I increase to a chain of 25?

Thanks.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.privacy.anon-server.]
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:26:54 +0000 (GMT), Anonymous wrote in
Message-Id: <6b18dcba54526b600a31509088f181d0@anon.bananasplit.info>:

> 	I am a very light user of the remailer network, about 10 messages a
> month.  My security needs are extreem, i.e. life or death or prision
> forever.  I currently use a chain of 20 remailers with stunnel
> ephemeral keys through Tor.  Is that adequate for a life or death
> situation dealing with a TLA.
>
> 	My concern is the appearence of new remailers of unknown reputation
> or origon; should I increase to a chain of 25?

20 remailers is the maximum the system supports.  This is because the
size of the Mixmaster message is fixed, regardless of the content.
Padding is used to bring all messages up to the same size.  With 20
remailers, your headers include little or no padding.

With chain lengths like that, you don't really need to worry about new
nodes and their reputations.  You only need 2 good-guys adjacent to each
other in the chain and your anonymity is secured.

If you want to be really really paranoid, you might want to hardcode
two adjacent nodes somewhere in your chain.  Those should be nodes you
trust and they should use Ephemeral TLS between them.  This ensures that
the message could never be compromised at a later time, even if all the
remailer keys were captured.  Not a likely event, but hey.  :-)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iQEVAwUBQ8PWZGoLu9HNUqmMAQr2Zgf/XTmxZf3KzAjhheLAUZDjAkcUdoT3V3tj
 2vTy0zXfedmetpl5Ps2+49xAWWimQmY6TFoTeN4n
T4pqfKxUblqB+YiGot/dl4SX
 WL0T0tOva6OoJt5yjY34IFbvki5WN1d48XbMj24t
au/flp5bpWPs8CqbIp+DiBEb
s1NM/ 1P+PI188GNtkvv2sdiYqBoIUH3mZ80vQA0OKt6SX
nYTxt9TKM0N3FnVPJr6
 20NterpdvP0suZDxaVNRRBVZG954LUtgYVhNtb5X
aZVNlXGmIZobT7mgq3SsnDY0
 vqqsGME+19QfJCIqsjyzfDmkPSuLjP6WqucpuZZ2
mgB0tPfh6ro2vQ==
=QvNw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
pub  1024D/8ED57743 2003-07-08 Bananasplit Operator
Key fingerprint = 796F 67E0 E890 A0BB BDAE  EBB4 94A6 7A09 8ED5 7743
uid                            Admin <admin.bananasplit.info>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:26:54 +0000 (GMT), Anonymous wrote:

> 	I am a very light user of the remailer network, about 10 messages a
> month.  My security needs are extreem, i.e. life or death or prision
> forever.  I currently use a chain of 20 remailers with stunnel
> ephemeral keys through Tor.  Is that adequate for a life or death
> situation dealing with a TLA.
>
> 	My concern is the appearence of new remailers of unknown reputation
> or origon; should I increase to a chain of 25?
>
> Thanks.

Do you trust ppl you don't know? Anyone of them could, and probably are,
compromised or owned by a TLA of some country.
--
Drop the alphabet for email

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:26:54 +0000, Anonymous wrote:

> 	I am a very light user of the remailer network, about 10 messages a
> month.  My security needs are extreem, i.e. life or death or prision
> forever.  I currently use a chain of 20 remailers with stunnel ephemeral
> keys through Tor.  Is that adequate for a life or death situation dealing
> with a TLA.

I don't know, but am curious as to what percentage of your messages get
through.

>
> 	My concern is the appearence of new remailers of unknown reputation
> or origon; should I increase to a chain of 25?

I would go for 40 if you have had a high percentage get through with 20.

>
> Thanks.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Ari Silverstein wrote:

> On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:26:54 +0000 (GMT), Anonymous wrote:
> 
>
> Do you trust ppl you don't know? Anyone of them could, and probably are,
> compromised or owned by a TLA of some country.
> --
> Drop the alphabet for email

It kind of makes you wonder how many Tor servers are run by TLA;
especially since (for now, at least) you cannot have more than 3 nodes in
a chain, it is low latency, and there's no padding.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

In article < 2fb87539938a30107b449e139795b86c@mixmast
er.it>
George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>
> I would go for 40 if you have had a high percentage get through with 20.

Eelbash, after running a remailer for 6 years, you should know
that the maximum chain length is 20 remailers. You can't go
higher.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>
> I don't know, but am curious as to what percentage of your messages get
> through.

If I avoid the remailer Eelbash, then all of my messages go through
with 20 remailers just fine. It does take a while to arrive though,
because of all the latency.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.privacy.anon-server:430195

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:27:47 +0000, Anonymous wrote:

> George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote: 
>
> If I avoid the remailer Eelbash, then all of my messages go through with
> 20 remailers just fine. It does take a while to arrive though, because of
> all the latency.

If you have been having trouble getting messages through when including
Eelbash in the chain, it's not surprising, since that remailer is no
longer in operation.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote:
> 
>
> If you have been having trouble getting messages through when including
> Eelbash in the chain, it's not surprising, since that remailer is no
> longer in operation.

When Eelbash was up, shit for brains.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 14:51:27 -0500 (EST), Troy McClure wrote:
 
>
> It kind of makes you wonder how many Tor servers are run by TLA;
> especially since (for now, at least) you cannot have more than 3 nodes in
> a chain, it is low latency, and there's no padding.

Well, it was an Office Of Naval Intel project.
--
Drop the alphabet for email

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]