anonymizer + remailer = 100% Anonymous email?

[Mike]

Archived from groups: alt.2600.hackers,alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

Want to know if I bring up anonymizer web site and then access the
RIOT Remailer web interface, located below, if I send an email, is it
considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?

thanks

Kevin

https://riot.eu.org/anon/remailer.html.en

 

[Tony]

Archived from groups: alt.2600.hackers,alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On 7 May 2004 09:54:27 -0700, 123456789@spamhole.com (Mike) wrote:

>Want to know if I bring up anonymizer web site and then access the
>RIOT Remailer web interface, located below, if I send an email, is it
>considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?
>
>thanks
>
>Kevin
>
>https://riot.eu.org/anon/remailer.html.en

You can never claim 100% security.
Servers can be under spook control.
Website owner can log all messages.
Bugged software.
Tranfic analysis.


From the site: "This method is less secure than the normal one, because the
encryption process is on this server and not on your computer."
So the interface in not 100% secure

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

Cross Posting? How many sites?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.2600.hackers,alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On 7 May 2004 09:54:27 -0700, Mike spoketh

>Want to know if I bring up anonymizer web site and then access the
>RIOT Remailer web interface, located below, if I send an email, is it
>considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?
>
>thanks
>
>Kevin
>
>https://riot.eu.org/anon/remailer.html.en

I got to ask why? Why do you need to send e-mail that are anonymous and
non-traceable? What possible legitimate reason would anyone have for
this?

Lars M. Hansen
www.hansenonline.net
Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
"If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.2600.hackers,alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

Mike wrote:

> Want to know if I bring up anonymizer web site and then access the
> RIOT Remailer web interface, located below, if I send an email, is
> it considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?
>
> thanks
>
> https://riot.eu.org/anon/remailer.html.en

Both, the remailer and the anonymizer would have to keep logs for you
to be traced. There would also have to be legal reason and court
ordered search warrants to seize the logs. Unless you're peddling
kiddy porn, or something highly illegal, you're probably safe. If you
want to flame your boss, have at it. He/she can never proove it came
from you.
--
Tim Weaver
"In the song, 'If the moon hits your eye like a big piece of pie,
that's amore', how do you suppose a door knob would feel?"
...Carlton Blanchard - Wings

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Sat, 8 May 2004 00:00:20 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous via the Cypherpunks
Tonga Remailer spoketh

>
>Same for posting. If you post under your real name, Lars, things that you
>post can come back to bite your ass years after you've posted them. Did you
>know, for example, it is now standard procedure in many HR departments to
>search Usenet for posts by potential hires?
>

Doesn't bother me ... they can look all they want...

Lars M. Hansen
www.hansenonline.net
Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
"If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.2600.hackers,alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Fri, 07 May 2004 20:13:02 GMT, in article
<9bqn9053chnjdl3rv02rtolue09ggl62i8@4ax.com>, Lars M. Hansen
<badnews@hansenonline.net> wrote:

>
>I got to ask why? Why do you need to send e-mail that are anonymous and
>non-traceable? What possible legitimate reason would anyone have for
>this?
>

Reporting financial irregularities/fraud at ones' workplace is one
that springs to mind.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On 7 May 2004 09:54:27 -0700, in <alt.privacy.spyware>, 123456789@spamhole.com
(Mike) wrote:
>
> Want to know if I bring up anonymizer web site and then access the
> RIOT Remailer web interface, located below, if I send an email, is it
> considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?
>
[snip]

There is no such thing as "100% anonymous and un-traceable" e-mail, unless you
personally have *sole* control over every system, server, router and cable
segment that the message traverses -- and probably not even then (cf.
"Tempest").

--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net


"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is expressly prohibited
under USC Title 47, Section 227. Violators are subject to charge of up to
$1,500 per incident or treble actual costs, whichever is greater.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On 7 May 2004 09:54:27 -0700, in <alt.privacy.spyware>, 123456789@spamhole.com
(Mike) wrote:
>
> Want to know if I bring up anonymizer web site and then access the
> RIOT Remailer web interface, located below, if I send an email, is it
> considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?
>
[snip]

There is no such thing as "100% anonymous and un-traceable" e-mail, unless you
personally have *sole* control over every system, server, router and cable
segment that the message traverses -- and probably not even then (cf.
"Tempest").

--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net


"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is expressly prohibited
under USC Title 47, Section 227. Violators are subject to charge of up to
$1,500 per incident or treble actual costs, whichever is greater.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.2600.hackers,alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Fri, 07 May 2004 20:13:02 +0000, Lars M. Hansen wrote:

> On 7 May 2004 09:54:27 -0700, Mike spoketh
>
>>Want to know if I bring up anonymizer web site and then access the
>>RIOT Remailer web interface, located below, if I send an email, is it
>>considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?
>>
>>thanks
>>
>>Kevin
>>
>>https://riot.eu.org/anon/remailer.html.en
>
> I got to ask why? Why do you need to send e-mail that are anonymous and
> non-traceable? What possible legitimate reason would anyone have for
> this?

I got to ask: "Are you from this world?"

Flip


> Lars M. Hansen
> www.hansenonline.net
> Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
> "If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.2600.hackers,alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Thu, 13 May 2004 01:15:08 +0200, flap flop spoketh


>
>I got to ask: "Are you from this world?"
>
>Flip
>
>

Even if I wasn't, how does that relate to anything? From the actual
answers that people have given to my question, I can agree with the
point that dissidents may need to use these tools to avoid being tracked
down by their government, but other than that, I see very little
legitimate use for these tools...

Lars M. Hansen
www.hansenonline.net
Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
"If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.2600.hackers,alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

>Even if I wasn't, how does that relate to anything? From the actual
>answers that people have given to my question, I can agree with the
>point that dissidents may need to use these tools to avoid being tracked
>down by their government, but other than that, I see very little
>legitimate use for these tools...

"Dissidents" or whistle blowers may have a legitimate need for anonymity, but I
seriously doubt that the OP is either politically oppressed or privy to some
dark industrial secret. The only anonymous postings I have seen come from trolls
and troublemakers. People who can't take responsibility for what they say are
cowards not worth reading.
--
Dave "Crash" Dummy - A weapon of mass destruction
crash@gpick.com?subject=Techtalk (Do not alter!)
http://lists.gpick.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.2600.hackers,alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Thu, 13 May 2004 00:05:55 +0000, Lars M. Hansen wrote:

> On Thu, 13 May 2004 01:15:08 +0200, flap flop spoketh
>
>
>>
>>I got to ask: "Are you from this world?"
>>
>>Flip
>>
>>
>
> Even if I wasn't, how does that relate to anything?

Well, how does your reply relate to this person's question? :
Q.: "if I send an email, is it
considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?"
A.: "What possible legitimate reason would anyone have for
this?"

Your response didn't (in my opinion) really relate to his
question in any meaningful way.
Your response implicitely suggests that there can only be
'illegitimate reasons' for this, and in itself is already
enough (legitimate) reason to ask for such a service.
Various paranoid (employees of) government agencies,
employers themselves and other institutions have no sense of
privacy, nor the will to comply to privacy regulations, and
cause people to want to be able to speak out their opinion
(which they are freely entitled to) without being sacked or
blacklisted or whatever else because some official didn't
like his opinion. It has happened that people here have had
their carreer destroyed by the secret service just because
they spoke out their opinion.
Do I have to refer to Mc Carthy and his communist witch hunt?
And maybe nowadays one can't express any simpathy with the
Palestinian/Islamic 'case' without being put on a 'watch list'
by the FBI?
Enough 'legitimate' reason for me to ask for an anonymous
service for expression of one's thought.



> From the actual
> answers that people have given to my question, I can agree with the
> point that dissidents may need to use these tools to avoid being tracked
> down by their government, but other than that, I see very little
> legitimate use for these tools...

People are easily called 'dissidents' for various ILLEGITIMATE
reasons. This tendency is also arising in the western world,
as it shows, and especially the usa, more and more
characteristics of a fascistoid state.

And yes, there are also 'dissidents' (you will soon hear
people in the western world also talk about 'dissidents') who
need the protection.

Flip

by the way: next time fill out the 'follow-up' header if you do
a lot of cross-postings


> Lars M. Hansen
> www.hansenonline.net
> Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
> "If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Thu, 13 May 2004 14:10:11 +0200, flap flop spoketh


>> Even if I wasn't, how does that relate to anything?
>
>Well, how does your reply relate to this person's question? :
>Q.: "if I send an email, is it
> considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?"
>A.: "What possible legitimate reason would anyone have for
> this?"
>
>Your response didn't (in my opinion) really relate to his
>question in any meaningful way.

Well, I was wondering why anyone would need to use such services, and
although that is not an answer to the original question, it is related
to topic at hand. Your question of my "origin", whether earthly or alien
was merely an insult, and added nothing to neither the OP's question nor
mine.

>Do I have to refer to Mc Carthy and his communist witch hunt?
>And maybe nowadays one can't express any simpathy with the
>Palestinian/Islamic 'case' without being put on a 'watch list'
>by the FBI?
>Enough 'legitimate' reason for me to ask for an anonymous
>service for expression of one's thought.
>

I am aware of McCarthyism and it's revival in the past couple of years.

Merely expressing sympathy for the Palestinian cause shouldn't be much
of a trigger for any type of investigation anywhere, unless the
expressions in question contains some indicators that it's more than
just "sympathy" and it's more than just "expressed".


Lars M. Hansen
www.hansenonline.net
Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
"If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.2600.hackers,alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

In article <10a6qa7nsq0ed8f@corp.supernews.com>
"\"Crash\" Dummy" <dvader@deathstar.mil> wrote:
>
> >Even if I wasn't, how does that relate to anything? From the actual
> >answers that people have given to my question, I can agree with the
> >point that dissidents may need to use these tools to avoid being tracked
> >down by their government, but other than that, I see very little
> >legitimate use for these tools...
>
> "Dissidents" or whistle blowers may have a legitimate need for anonymity, but I
> seriously doubt that the OP is either politically oppressed or privy to some
> dark industrial secret. The only anonymous postings I have seen come from trolls
> and troublemakers. People who can't take responsibility for what they say are
> cowards not worth reading.

This from a dumb shithead named "Crash" Dummy.

Your mother named you that, I presume?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.2600.hackers,alt.security.pgp,alt.privacy.spyware,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

In article <vqe5a0hhh5i0se0tahj5h1pdkbnidscd5v@4ax.com>
Lars M. Hansen <badnews@hansenonline.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 May 2004 01:15:08 +0200, flap flop spoketh
>
>
> >
> >I got to ask: "Are you from this world?"
> >
> >Flip
> >
> >
>
> Even if I wasn't, how does that relate to anything? From the actual
> answers that people have given to my question, I can agree with the
> point that dissidents may need to use these tools to avoid being tracked
> down by their government, but other than that, I see very little
> legitimate use for these tools...

That's okay. Your understanding and approval are completely superfluous.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Thu, 13 May 2004 12:06:06 -0400, "Crash" Dummy wrote:

>>This from a dumb shithead named "Crash" Dummy.

[skip>

> How about you? All I get from you is:
>
> "Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above.
> It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software.
> Please report problems or inappropriate use to the
> remailer administrator at <abuse@frell.theremailer.net>."
>
> Which is typical of gutless trolls.

Which does not make anybody who uses this method a troll.

Flip

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

>Which does not make anybody who uses this method a troll.

Perhaps not. I've just never seen the other kind.
--
Dave "Crash" Dummy - A weapon of mass destruction
crash@gpick.com?subject=Techtalk (Do not alter!)
http://lists.gpick.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Thu, 13 May 2004 15:41:58 +0000, Lars M. Hansen wrote:

> On Thu, 13 May 2004 14:10:11 +0200, flap flop spoketh
>
>
>>> Even if I wasn't, how does that relate to anything?
>>
>>Well, how does your reply relate to this person's question? :
>>Q.: "if I send an email, is it
>> considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?"
>>A.: "What possible legitimate reason would anyone have for
>> this?"
>>
>>Your response didn't (in my opinion) really relate to his
>>question in any meaningful way.
>
> Well, I was wondering why anyone would need to use such services, and
> although that is not an answer to the original question, it is related
> to topic at hand. Your question of my "origin", whether earthly or alien
> was merely an insult, and added nothing to neither the OP's question nor
> mine.

Well sorry, wasn't my intention to insult you, but I considered it
extremely naïve to think there can only be illegitimate reasons
to want anonymous communication.
Or malicious to state (albeit implicitly)
that somebody who wants to communicate anonymously can only have
illegitimate reasons for this.

>>Do I have to refer to Mc Carthy and his communist witch hunt?
>>And maybe nowadays one can't express any simpathy with the
>>Palestinian/Islamic 'case' without being put on a 'watch list'
>>by the FBI?
>>Enough 'legitimate' reason for me to ask for an anonymous
>>service for expression of one's thought.
>>
>
> I am aware of McCarthyism and it's revival in the past couple of years.
>
> Merely expressing sympathy for the Palestinian cause shouldn't be much
> of a trigger for any type of investigation anywhere, unless the
> expressions in question contains some indicators that it's more than
> just "sympathy" and it's more than just "expressed".

You are right that it 'should not' be a trigger, but we all know
that some people only need such a shouldn't-be-trigger to do it
anyway.
What 'triggered' me was the fact that you immediately questioned the
legitimacy of somebody's wish to communicate anonymously.

Cheers,

Flip




> Lars M. Hansen
> www.hansenonline.net
> Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
> "If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Fri, 14 May 2004 10:23:50 +0200, flap flop spoketh

>On Thu, 13 May 2004 15:41:58 +0000, Lars M. Hansen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 13 May 2004 14:10:11 +0200, flap flop spoketh
>>
>>
>>>> Even if I wasn't, how does that relate to anything?
>>>
>>>Well, how does your reply relate to this person's question? :
>>>Q.: "if I send an email, is it
>>> considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?"
>>>A.: "What possible legitimate reason would anyone have for
>>> this?"
>>>
>>>Your response didn't (in my opinion) really relate to his
>>>question in any meaningful way.
>>
>> Well, I was wondering why anyone would need to use such services, and
>> although that is not an answer to the original question, it is related
>> to topic at hand. Your question of my "origin", whether earthly or alien
>> was merely an insult, and added nothing to neither the OP's question nor
>> mine.
>
>Well sorry, wasn't my intention to insult you, but I considered it
>extremely naïve to think there can only be illegitimate reasons
>to want anonymous communication.
>Or malicious to state (albeit implicitly)
>that somebody who wants to communicate anonymously can only have
>illegitimate reasons for this.
>

You have to understand, I come from the other side of the fence; I deal
in security. Remailers and such are considered as means for people to do
their deeds while hiding their location and/or identity. This could be
either attempted intrusions into a network, or something as simple as
spamming or attempted mail relaying.

>>>Do I have to refer to Mc Carthy and his communist witch hunt?
>>>And maybe nowadays one can't express any simpathy with the
>>>Palestinian/Islamic 'case' without being put on a 'watch list'
>>>by the FBI?
>>>Enough 'legitimate' reason for me to ask for an anonymous
>>>service for expression of one's thought.
>>>
>>
>> I am aware of McCarthyism and it's revival in the past couple of years.
>>
>> Merely expressing sympathy for the Palestinian cause shouldn't be much
>> of a trigger for any type of investigation anywhere, unless the
>> expressions in question contains some indicators that it's more than
>> just "sympathy" and it's more than just "expressed".
>
>You are right that it 'should not' be a trigger, but we all know
>that some people only need such a shouldn't-be-trigger to do it
>anyway.
>What 'triggered' me was the fact that you immediately questioned the
>legitimacy of somebody's wish to communicate anonymously.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Flip
>

And likewise, you just assumed that the OP had legitimate reasons for
communicating anonymously.

Lars M. Hansen
http://www.hansenonline.net
(replace 'badnews' with 'news' in e-mail address)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Fri, 14 May 2004 06:45:03 -0400, Lars M. Hansen wrote:

> On Fri, 14 May 2004 10:23:50 +0200, flap flop spoketh

[skipping>

>>Well sorry, wasn't my intention to insult you, but I considered it
>>extremely naïve to think there can only be illegitimate reasons
>>to want anonymous communication.
>>Or malicious to state (albeit implicitly)
>>that somebody who wants to communicate anonymously can only have
>>illegitimate reasons for this.

> You have to understand, I come from the other side of the fence; I deal
> in security. Remailers and such are considered as means for people to do
> their deeds while hiding their location and/or identity. This could be
> either attempted intrusions into a network, or something as simple as
> spamming or attempted mail relaying.

Yes, I understand that completely.
I hope that now it is clear enough that also completely 'normal' and
law-abiding people are entitled to the use of anonymous communication

[another skip of a most interesting part of the communication>

> And likewise, you just assumed that the OP had legitimate reasons for
> communicating anonymously.

No, I most certainly did not.
I am aware of the fact that both people with respectful motives, as
well as with malicious intentions will use anonymous communications.
But I don't like the reasoning that
"whereas pigs have small eyes, people with small eyes must be pigs".

Cheers,

Flip



> Lars M. Hansen
> http://www.hansenonline.net
> (replace 'badnews' with 'news' in e-mail address)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Fri, 14 May 2004 09:12:34 -0400, "Crash" Dummy wrote:

> >Which does not make anybody who uses this method a troll.
>
> Perhaps not. I've just never seen the other kind.

The concepts of reality that you adopt are your responsibility, good luck
with it.

flip

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Thu, 13 May 2004 15:41:58 +0000, Lars M. Hansen wrote:

> On Thu, 13 May 2004 14:10:11 +0200, flap flop spoketh
>
>
>>> Even if I wasn't, how does that relate to anything?
>>
>>Well, how does your reply relate to this person's question? :
>>Q.: "if I send an email, is it
>> considered 100% anonymous and un-traceable?"
>>A.: "What possible legitimate reason would anyone have for
>> this?"
>>
>>Your response didn't (in my opinion) really relate to his
>>question in any meaningful way.
>
> Well, I was wondering why anyone would need to use such services, and
> although that is not an answer to the original question, it is related
> to topic at hand. Your question of my "origin", whether earthly or alien
> was merely an insult, and added nothing to neither the OP's question nor
> mine.
>
>>Do I have to refer to Mc Carthy and his communist witch hunt?
>>And maybe nowadays one can't express any simpathy with the
>>Palestinian/Islamic 'case' without being put on a 'watch list'
>>by the FBI?
>>Enough 'legitimate' reason for me to ask for an anonymous
>>service for expression of one's thought.
>>
>
> I am aware of McCarthyism and it's revival in the past couple of years.
>
> Merely expressing sympathy for the Palestinian cause shouldn't be much
> of a trigger for any type of investigation anywhere, unless the
> expressions in question contains some indicators that it's more than
> just "sympathy" and it's more than just "expressed".

You are right that it 'should not' be a trigger, but we all know
that some people only need such a shouldn't-be-trigger to do it
anyway.
What 'triggered' me was the fact that you immediately questioned the
legitimacy of somebody's wish to communicate anonymously.

Cheers,

Flip




> Lars M. Hansen
> www.hansenonline.net
> Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
> "If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"