This message has been sent through 15 remailers
No User
>Subject: This message has been sent through 15 remailers
>Send Time: 04:15PM ET Wed 16
I have to call <<BULLSHIT!>> on this one. Check the total latency.
Nice try, jackass.
Paul Rubin
<nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>I fail to understand your indignation, sir. This message actually WAS
>chained through 15 remailers,
>all of which had a latency of less than 1 hour (most less than 20 minutes)
>and with a showing 100% uptime. No remailer was used more than twice.
>Frankly I didn't expect it to get here so soon. Guess the tides must have
>been right.
What were the 15 remailers?
Jiggs McManus
+>Subject: This message has been sent through 15 remailers
+>Send Time: 04:15PM ET Wed 16
+I have to call <<BULLSHIT!>> on this one. Check the total +latency.
>I fail to understand your indignation, sir. This message
>actually WAS chained through 15 remailers, all of which had
>a latency of less than 1 hour (most less than 20 minutes)
>and with a showing 100% uptime. No remailer was used more
>than twice. Frankly I didn't expect it to get here so soon.
>Guess the tides must have been right.
Check it out. EDT is -0400. You sent it at 2015 ZULU.
The last remailer posted it at 1639 -0500 = 2139 ZULU.
Fifteen remailers in less than ninety minutes? I agree with the
skeptic: I don't think so!
What was the exact chain? We should be able to replicate this, if
true.
ste...@olsusa.nospam.com
On 17 Aug 2000 04:12:38 -0000, nob...@eelknot.com (Jiggs McManus)
wrote:
++>Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 16:39:45 -0500
++>Subject: This message has been sent through 15 remailers
+
++>Send Time: 04:15PM ET Wed 16
+
++I have to call <<BULLSHIT!>> on this one. Check the total
+latency.
+
+>I fail to understand your indignation, sir. This message
+>actually WAS chained through 15 remailers, all of which had
+>a latency of less than 1 hour (most less than 20 minutes)
+>and with a showing 100% uptime. No remailer was used more
+>than twice. Frankly I didn't expect it to get here so soon.
+>Guess the tides must have been right.
+Check it out. EDT is -0400. You sent it at 2015 ZULU.
+The last remailer posted it at 1639 -0500 = 2139 ZULU.
+Fifteen remailers in less than ninety minutes? I agree with the
+skeptic: I don't think so!
+What was the exact chain? We should be able to replicate this, if
+true.
I was a bit skeptical myself. But yet the fact remains. That message
went through 15 Cpunk remailers. What surprises me the most though,
is the time it took to propagate through them all. THAT seems rather
strange. I'm not surprised that the message arrived. I have sent
messages through 15 remailers or more in the past successfully. You
probably have about a 50/50 chance or so at 15. Especially using
Cpunk.
20 is another story. Chaining 20, your initial message will be around
721k or so. Some remailers won't even handle that. At least not the
initial ones in the chain. The second test was done using 20
mixmasters.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQEVAwUBOZt/j60p+NeNoJo5AQEIhgf+IggAXgRT4WqZinH3ZpE/q85N/NhaEj7B
HAolREYiX8u3vfbeiStRryXmom5/80rOABn5un9M3rshjKnPJviMe2l15FDXu4MH
A+8XoQmBB4ToADsPTR0gl9YmYjhMquPBAJMHtPKaAhZWPPw3U5tez2Gd1lIvG3il
5IcjSNHhiHC09JMb/TTyjTQ7/O3Z8xj/XVHUrOXIZPjwQcREmdwg0jYeK/EihPiz
WSbKUnY6unrGf4iGmxdSA37Ucxxo0iUl93p3wMdEeRcO/6h5X/X20Iib9QDhZL6G
hoaqB0H0ZnfOjIDsEZq+S48liq0hALl+iWwaDlZwdkTH5poEhAoMSA==
=TStq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
RSA Fingerprint = 15BD C30C 2790 517D 838C 9996 D1F3 6FF0
ste...@olsusa.nospam.com
First, they were all Cypherpunk remailers. The final message size was
around 147k I believe. The book has since been changed because I
have done some new tests to this group (with the same book (JBN2)).
But I do know that I simply went down the list and only used
remailers
with a LESS than 1 hour latency. But here are the ones for the new
tests:
Send Time: 11:42PM ET Wed 16
Austria-
Bilgates-
Stealth-
Eelbash-
Gretchen-
Randseed-
Shinn-
Swiss-
Xganon-
Austria-
Bilgates-
Dizum-
Ealbash-
Gretchen-
Randseed-
Shinn-
Swiss-
Xganon-
Austria-
Eelbash-
It was about the same with the Cpunks, only there were 15 instead of
20. Each 100% remail was used twice, (I had included my own also).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQEVAwUBOZtr9a0p+NeNoJo5AQEZcAgAhWKzEFztiJydApWvidZjv+MORA49c1q8
mScWg+gUL+5cNRt5CCxIchWd58qIyD8usiM9Nr3WMwYAivw+BCY79hq329cLeg2y
M2MKpZWMfy+aImL91wuYaZC1XKfVJ2i/5SZxnQnLHcJ0cGWFrOJflKH8dd8sDvJU
9Tnuz3bbAo3ljzXWURpBw7QMwYYFNkLkq4SGrN4zpkHyIDp3SEYzSQMX0r5vngXX
latLFmrZ+ggZe3Sm205wrL8RcK9WPp/B8z7ZJWekNdr4dEAMh8VcMjVUncQR9oez
H9E7mKa1kIadbxEh02p193p9Mv0fSdZoyeWbnKcymHC3mhG4FAGjGw==
=/0AY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Ralph Hilton
Austria has a size limit of less than this message size. How do you get by
that?
--
Ralph Hilton
http://www.fzint.org/rhilton
Freezone International: http://www.fzint.org
C-Meter: http://www.inquisitive-instruments.co.uk/
Memorabilia http://mp3.cafepress.com/fzint/
ste...@olsusa.nospam.com
wrote:
+On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 04:37:49 GMT, ste...@olsusa.nospam.com wrote:
+
+Austria has a size limit of less than this message size. How do you
get by
+that?
Actually what I had the most difficult time with was Dizum. Initially
I had it in the chain twice, but kept getting max size warnings so had
to substitute something else. I never got any warnings on Austria, but
in my capability string for Austria, it shows max message size at
klen 1024.
In the final analysis... had I known that message was going to for
sure make it, I would have taken more careful notes of exactly which
remailers were used and in which order. When I have conducted mass
remailer chaining tests in the past, it has always been to alt.test.
By picking the remailers carefully, I had been able to get messages
through around 50% of the time, even though it took a while. When I
chained 20, that figure dropped to only around 20%. (With Cpunk, a 20
remailer final message will end up being over 700k, whereas it's 29k
with Mix regardless).
What gets me most though...
is the TIME it took. It seems impossible, but yet it happened. That
gives me more reason for concern than anything else. More than likely
in was probably in 1 in 1000 fluke.
No User
>is the TIME it took. It seems impossible, but yet it
>happened. That gives me more reason for concern than
>anything else. More than likely in was probably in 1
>in 1000 fluke.
You never said how you did this. Did you do it manually (as I always
do), or did you use JBN or some other program?
My suspicion is that if it was the latter, something happened and you
did not actually get all those remailers in the loop.
Also, using the same remailer more than once in a chain is bad
practice, at best nearly useless, if one is chaining to avoid a
compromised remailer.
I also notice that none were middleman remailers.
Can you chain three sucessive middleman remailers and have the
message come out anywhere?
I can't. I can get three cypherpunks - sometimes four - to
eventually get a good message, but not three middlemen.
Never yet in at least a hundred tests.