XPost: alt.privacy.anon-server, misc.phone.mobile.iphone   
   From: bob@radio-eriwan.ru   
      
   Yamn Remailer wrote:   
      
   > You're mad! He did a comparison including a score for each of the items.   
   >   
   > The most severe problems seem to be   
   >   
   > | >> So tell us some facts about the superiority of your system compared   
   > | >> with the Mixmaster / YAMN design, where for example we have   
   > | >>   
   > | >> - a uniform packet design irrespective of message size   
   > | >   
   > | >The Onion Courier Mixnet uses with it's client random adaptive padding   
   > | >when sending messages, so that third parties do not know what is send,   
   > | >compared to fixed padding payloads. Once the messages enters the pool   
   > | >padding will be removed and then fixed size padding at each hop will   
   > | >be applied.   
   > |   
   > | Worse - That's a devastating flaw of your not so modern Type 1 system,   
   > | as padding only increases size and a larger message is doomed to stick   
   > | out like a sore thumb, whereas with Type 2 remailers all packets are of   
   > | equal size of 4 kB (Mixmaster) or 20 kB (YAMN) with larger messages   
   > | being split and reassembled at the exit remailer.  That's the main   
   > | reason why Type 1 remailing is obsolete and was abandoned years ago in   
   > | favour of Type 2 Mixmaster / YAMN!   
   >   
   > and   
   >   
   > | >> - message routing through multiple chains to increase reliability   
   > | >   
   > | >The Onion Courier Mixnet, compared to the Mixmaster and YAMN Mixnet,   
   > | >is totally decentralized and anonymous mix nodes can communicate with   
   > | >public Tor Hidden Service mix nodes to form different chains.   
   > |   
   > | Worse - Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAICS each message is sent through   
   > | just one single chain of nodes, which means it gets lost if one of these   
   > | nodes is down.   
   >   
   > To me those are knockout criteria.   
   >   
   > So a simple question: Is he right?   
      
   We should ask ourselves the following questions for a) and b).   
      
   a) What can ISPs see when examining tor cells, each 514 bytes in size? Can they   
   count that you always send equal in size remailer packets when using YAMN and   
   know then that you use a remailer service? I would say yes. With adaptive   
   padding they have a much harder time to guess, no?   
      
   b) Don't you loose remailer packets, if you use copies=n with the same chain   
   when one node is down or when selecting random yamn chains and a node is down?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)