cryptographically-provable anonymity

[rayzer@riseup.net (Rayzer)]

On 06/07/2016 06:55 AM, J.M. Porup wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 08:25:49PM -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:
>> Since nobody asked, here's a description of why neither TOR nor any
>> other existing or presently planned anonymizing protocol I know of can
>> be relied on to conceal a user's identity from the Five Eyes or any of
>> several other hostile actors.
> I wrote about the Dissent Project last year:
>
> https://motherboard.vice.com/read/dissent-a-new-type-of-security-tool-could-markedly-improve-online-anonymity
>
> project home page:
>
> http://dedis.cs.yale.edu/dissent/
>
> Serious project, led by Bryan Ford at EPFL. Roger Dingledine said nice
> things about it.
>
> Project seems to lack momentum, but could offer cryptographically-
> provable anonymity guarantees, as long as real-time comms is not the 
> use case.
>
> jmp
>
>
>

SOMEONE'S got to spew here about Yale's connection to the CIA...

Juan?

Rr

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20160607/c8557a7e/attachment.sig>