# Chain:
yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn2@mixmin.net

The 1st hope was specified by me, the 2nd one was chosen by YAMN.

yamn.cfg:

[Stats]
Minrel=98.5
Relfinal=98.5
Distance=3

On 2021-08-29 6:08 p.m., Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
> # Chain:
> yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn2@mixmin.net
>
> The 1st hope was specified by me, the 2nd one was chosen by YAMN.
>
> yamn.cfg:
>
> [Stats]
> Minrel=98.5
> Relfinal=98.5
> Distance=3

"Distance" is not a valid setting in YAMN.

My experience with YAMN has taught me that it doesn't behave well when
you try and hardcode your chains.

Just let it pick some randoms for you and it will. It will also pick an
exit for your last remailer, so you don't have to concern yourself with
that.

*,*,*,* is the chain that I would suggest you use.

--
SEC3

YAMN Tutorials - https://sec3.net/yamnhelp

In article <N3VWI.966062$Jv1.514157@fx07.ams1> SEC3 <admin@sec3.net>
wrote:

>On 2021-08-29 6:08 p.m., Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
>> # Chain:
>> yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn2@mixmin.net
>>
>> The 1st hope was specified by me, the 2nd one was chosen by YAMN.
>>
>> yamn.cfg:
>>
>> [Stats]
>> Minrel=98.5
>> Relfinal=98.5
>> Distance=3
>
>"Distance" is not a valid setting in YAMN.
>
>My experience with YAMN has taught me that it doesn't behave well when
>you try and hardcode your chains.
>
>Just let it pick some randoms for you and it will. It will also pick an
>exit for your last remailer, so you don't have to concern yourself with
>that.
>
>*,*,*,* is the chain that I would suggest you use.

Does Yamn like Mixmaster use a starex strategy to avoid chains of
remailers that are all run by a single entity or organization?

In article <587e60b693622bb770e36eabfbde696b@dizum.com>
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> In article <N3VWI.966062$Jv1.514157@fx07.ams1> SEC3 <admin@sec3.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On 2021-08-29 6:08 p.m., Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
> >> # Chain:
> >> yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn2@mixmin.net
> >>
> >> The 1st hope was specified by me, the 2nd one was chosen by YAMN.
> >>
> >> yamn.cfg:
> >>
> >> [Stats]
> >> Minrel=98.5
> >> Relfinal=98.5
> >> Distance=3
> >
> >"Distance" is not a valid setting in YAMN.
> >
> >My experience with YAMN has taught me that it doesn't behave well when
> >you try and hardcode your chains.
> >
> >Just let it pick some randoms for you and it will. It will also pick an
> >exit for your last remailer, so you don't have to concern yourself with
> >that.
> >
> >*,*,*,* is the chain that I would suggest you use.
>
> Does Yamn like Mixmaster use a starex strategy to avoid chains of
> remailers that are all run by a single entity or organization?

Nope.

But you can manually hardcode chains as long as you don't get
too stupid about it.

Chain: yamn3,inwtx,hal works, but sometimes you get the below
when you do. The post DOES go through.

mail.go:329: SMTP Connection Error: Server=127.0.0.1:3048,
Error=EOF
mail.go:258: SMTP relay failed
pool.go:76: Pool mailing failed: EOF

As the OP advised, *,*,*,* is good or *,*,*,yamn2 if you need
name support.

Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:

>In article <587e60b693622bb770e36eabfbde696b@dizum.com>
>Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

>> Does Yamn like Mixmaster use a starex strategy to avoid chains of
>> remailers that are all run by a single entity or organization?
>
>Nope.
>
>But you can manually hardcode chains as long as you don't get
>too stupid about it.

But by doing so you can't send multiple copies, which is important for a
reliable delivery.

>
>As the OP advised, *,*,*,* is good or *,*,*,yamn2 if you need
>name support.

| Stats-Version: 2.0
| Generated: Mon 30 Aug 2021 10:30:02 GMT
| Mixmaster Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime Options
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------
| austria ???????10111 :33 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
| hal ?????0000000 :09 ?????+++++++ 100.0%
| inwtx 001011000100 :18 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
| lambton ?11111111111 :29 ?+++++++++++ 100.0% D
| len ????10000000 :09 ????++++++++ 100.0%
| middleman 101111111101 :31 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
| paranoyamn 011000000000 :13 ++++++++++++ 100.0%
| tncmm 101111111110 :25 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
| victor ??????111112 :36 ??????++++++ 100.0% D
| wig ???110111111 :24 ???+++++++++ 100.0% D
| yamn ????11000000 :14 ????++++++++ 100.0%
| yamn3 ?10000001000 :14 ?+++++++++++ 100.0%
| yamn4 ???????10111 :26 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
| yamn2 100100000000 :12 +++++++++++9 99.7%

Be honest, which of those YAMN remailers are in one hand?

Missing starex, as long as there's no strict one-remailer-per-operator
rule it's much too dangerous for me to participate in YAMN and get
compromised.

On Monday, August 30, 2021 at 1:47:37 PM UTC+2, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> Anonymous <nob...@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>
> >In article <587e60b693622bb7...@dizum.com>
> >Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> >> Does Yamn like Mixmaster use a starex strategy to avoid chains of
> >> remailers that are all run by a single entity or organization?
> >
> >Nope.
> >
> >But you can manually hardcode chains as long as you don't get
> >too stupid about it.
> But by doing so you can't send multiple copies, which is important for a
> reliable delivery.
> >
> >As the OP advised, *,*,*,* is good or *,*,*,yamn2 if you need
> >name support.
> | Stats-Version: 2.0
> | Generated: Mon 30 Aug 2021 10:30:02 GMT
> | Mixmaster Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime Options
> | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | austria ???????10111 :33 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
> | hal ?????0000000 :09 ?????+++++++ 100.0%
> | inwtx 001011000100 :18 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> | lambton ?11111111111 :29 ?+++++++++++ 100.0% D
> | len ????10000000 :09 ????++++++++ 100.0%
> | middleman 101111111101 :31 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> | paranoyamn 011000000000 :13 ++++++++++++ 100.0%
> | tncmm 101111111110 :25 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> | victor ??????111112 :36 ??????++++++ 100.0% D
> | wig ???110111111 :24 ???+++++++++ 100.0% D
> | yamn ????11000000 :14 ????++++++++ 100.0%
> | yamn3 ?10000001000 :14 ?+++++++++++ 100.0%
> | yamn4 ???????10111 :26 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
> | yamn2 100100000000 :12 +++++++++++9 99.7%
>
> Be honest, which of those YAMN remailers are in one hand?

I run hal and len.

> Missing starex, as long as there's no strict one-remailer-per-operator
> rule it's much too dangerous for me to participate in YAMN and get
> compromised.

Quick questions for you.

Do you know if third parties are theoretically and technically able to append
long lifetime secret key files from each Mixmaster to one Mixmaster secret
key file, in case third parties would like to mount something like an eclipse
attack? Or why Zax invented short living YAMN keys (14 days)?

Regards
Stefan

Stefan Claas wrote:

>On Monday, August 30, 2021 at 1:47:37 PM UTC+2, Nomen Nescio wrote:

>> | Mixmaster Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime Options
>> | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> | austria ???????10111 :33 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
>> | hal ?????0000000 :09 ?????+++++++ 100.0%
>> | inwtx 001011000100 :18 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> | lambton ?11111111111 :29 ?+++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> | len ????10000000 :09 ????++++++++ 100.0%
>> | middleman 101111111101 :31 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> | paranoyamn 011000000000 :13 ++++++++++++ 100.0%
>> | tncmm 101111111110 :25 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> | victor ??????111112 :36 ??????++++++ 100.0% D
>> | wig ???110111111 :24 ???+++++++++ 100.0% D
>> | yamn ????11000000 :14 ????++++++++ 100.0%
>> | yamn3 ?10000001000 :14 ?+++++++++++ 100.0%
>> | yamn4 ???????10111 :26 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
>> | yamn2 100100000000 :12 +++++++++++9 99.7%
>>
>> Be honest, which of those YAMN remailers are in one hand?
>
>I run hal and len.

How about inwtx? And finally there are yamn ... yamn4, held by Zax.
YMMV, but too hot for me.

>
>> Missing starex, as long as there's no strict one-remailer-per-operator
>> rule it's much too dangerous for me to participate in YAMN and get
>> compromised.
>
>Quick questions for you.
>
>Do you know if third parties are theoretically and technically able to append
>long lifetime secret key files from each Mixmaster to one Mixmaster secret
>key file, in case third parties would like to mount something like an eclipse
>attack?

Own or take over a reputable pinger service and offer remailer
participants statistics and key files of a network topology completely
under your control. At first they're toast, some time later you are. ;)

> Or why Zax invented short living YAMN keys (14 days)?

That's an invention? Don't you think you're setting the bar a little
low, as with Mixmaster you also define key lifetime in days, not in
years.

On Monday, August 30, 2021 at 8:30:03 PM UTC+2, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> Stefan Claas wrote:
> >> Be honest, which of those YAMN remailers are in one hand?
> >
> >I run hal and len.
> How about inwtx? And finally there are yamn ... yamn4, held by Zax.
> YMMV, but too hot for me.

I must admit I do not know which Remailers besides his inwtx one he also
runs, if any.

Another thing which I like to point out. We can combine message(s) sending
with YAMN, Mixmaster and also Bitmessage. Nym is currently not (yet)
an option for such tasks (wish I was a Golang programmer, like Zax is ...)

Then there would be another question from me. Why not all Mixmaster Remops
gave YAMN a try, to increase the YAMN Network, or in case they had doubts, did
not say so, or what else improvements over Mixmaster they had like seen.

I ask because I see YAMN as a TypeII+ Remailer, compared to Mixmaster, which's
development and Network should be supported, because it runs on so many
different devices.

> >> Missing starex, as long as there's no strict one-remailer-per-operator
> >> rule it's much too dangerous for me to participate in YAMN and get
> >> compromised.
> >
> >Quick questions for you.
> >
> >Do you know if third parties are theoretically and technically able to append
> >long lifetime secret key files from each Mixmaster to one Mixmaster secret
> >key file, in case third parties would like to mount something like an eclipse
> >attack?
> Own or take over a reputable pinger service and offer remailer
> participants statistics and key files of a network topology completely
> under your control. At first they're toast, some time later you are. ;)

Another interesting thought. :-)

> > Or why Zax invented short living YAMN keys (14 days)?
> That's an invention? Don't you think you're setting the bar a little
> low, as with Mixmaster you also define key lifetime in days, not in
> years.

Well, invention in that sense that Zax drastically shortened the standard
key lifetime, compared to IIRC standard Mixmaster settings.

Regards
Stefan

In article <75795cd43ba7f3888407bff19003f237@dizum.com>
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>
> >In article <587e60b693622bb770e36eabfbde696b@dizum.com>
> >Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> >> Does Yamn like Mixmaster use a starex strategy to avoid chains of
> >> remailers that are all run by a single entity or organization?
> >
> >Nope.
> >
> >But you can manually hardcode chains as long as you don't get
> >too stupid about it.
>
> But by doing so you can't send multiple copies, which is important for a
> reliable delivery.

Yes you can.

Do some testing, make an honest effort to read the Info:

>
> >
> >As the OP advised, *,*,*,* is good or *,*,*,yamn2 if you need
> >name support.
>
> | Stats-Version: 2.0
> | Generated: Mon 30 Aug 2021 10:30:02 GMT
> | Mixmaster Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime Options
> | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | austria ???????10111 :33 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
> | hal ?????0000000 :09 ?????+++++++ 100.0%
> | inwtx 001011000100 :18 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> | lambton ?11111111111 :29 ?+++++++++++ 100.0% D
> | len ????10000000 :09 ????++++++++ 100.0%
> | middleman 101111111101 :31 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> | paranoyamn 011000000000 :13 ++++++++++++ 100.0%
> | tncmm 101111111110 :25 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> | victor ??????111112 :36 ??????++++++ 100.0% D
> | wig ???110111111 :24 ???+++++++++ 100.0% D
> | yamn ????11000000 :14 ????++++++++ 100.0%
> | yamn3 ?10000001000 :14 ?+++++++++++ 100.0%
> | yamn4 ???????10111 :26 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
> | yamn2 100100000000 :12 +++++++++++9 99.7%
>
> Be honest, which of those YAMN remailers are in one hand?
>
> Missing starex, as long as there's no strict one-remailer-per-operator
> rule it's much too dangerous for me to participate in YAMN and get
> compromised.

Do your own.

Chain: yamn3,inwtx,*,hal Copies=3
Chain: *,*,*,yamn3 Copies=3
Chain: *,wig,*,yamn2 Copies=3
Chain: *,*,tncmm,paranoyamn Copies=3

> That's an invention? Don't you think you're setting the bar a little
> low, as with Mixmaster you also define key lifetime in days, not in
> years.

| From: Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
| Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server
| References: <slrnjpdprj.72l.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at> <v7udp75h40p0ngde84dq9h9qchm3onvmp5@Osama-is-dead.net> <slrnjpdvem.c5g.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at>
| Subject: Re: austria remailer's keys compromised
| Message-ID: <b1f9788b07c07ddc3351255e5d7669e4@dizum.com>
| Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:04:22 +0200 (CEST)
| Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com
| Organization: mail2news@dizum.com
| Xref: news.mixmin.net alt.privacy.anon-server:39878
|
| christian mock wrote:
|
| >G Morgan <sealteam6@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:
| >
| >>>What does this mean?
| >>
| >> The US authorities are going to grab an image of every remailer
| >> drive and break the chain?
| >
| >That would only make sense if they seized all remailers at the same
| >time, or else they risk keys getting wiped in anticipation of their
| >next move.
|
| That's a minor risk. Let's see whether there are remops who renew
| keys after those incidents. Keys are usually valid for one year.
|
| I don't know whether two Mixmaster keys could be used at the same time
| for message decryption. But if so, why not always have two keys
| simultaneously in action with the older one being renewed every week?
| No message is in transit for such a long time. Users just had to
| update keys more often.

>> | Stats-Version: 2.0
>> | Generated: Mon 30 Aug 2021 10:30:02 GMT
>> | Mixmaster Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime Options
>> | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> | austria ???????10111 :33 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
>> | hal ?????0000000 :09 ?????+++++++ 100.0%
>> | inwtx 001011000100 :18 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> | lambton ?11111111111 :29 ?+++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> | len ????10000000 :09 ????++++++++ 100.0%
>> | middleman 101111111101 :31 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> | paranoyamn 011000000000 :13 ++++++++++++ 100.0%
>> | tncmm 101111111110 :25 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> | victor ??????111112 :36 ??????++++++ 100.0% D
>> | wig ???110111111 :24 ???+++++++++ 100.0% D
>> | yamn ????11000000 :14 ????++++++++ 100.0%
>> | yamn3 ?10000001000 :14 ?+++++++++++ 100.0%
>> | yamn4 ???????10111 :26 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
>> | yamn2 100100000000 :12 +++++++++++9 99.7%

> Chain: *,*,*,yamn3 Copies=3

-> yamn,yamn1,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
-> yamn2,yamn,yamn4,yamn3 -> toast
-> yamn4,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
-> yamn,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
-> yamn1,yamn4,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
.... toast, toast, toast

In article
<3deb701d98b10af9feaeff4ed9fc94eb@remailer.paranoici.org>
Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>
> >> | Stats-Version: 2.0
> >> | Generated: Mon 30 Aug 2021 10:30:02 GMT
> >> | Mixmaster Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime Options
> >> | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> | austria ???????10111 :33 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
> >> | hal ?????0000000 :09 ?????+++++++ 100.0%
> >> | inwtx 001011000100 :18 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> >> | lambton ?11111111111 :29 ?+++++++++++ 100.0% D
> >> | len ????10000000 :09 ????++++++++ 100.0%
> >> | middleman 101111111101 :31 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> >> | paranoyamn 011000000000 :13 ++++++++++++ 100.0%
> >> | tncmm 101111111110 :25 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> >> | victor ??????111112 :36 ??????++++++ 100.0% D
> >> | wig ???110111111 :24 ???+++++++++ 100.0% D
> >> | yamn ????11000000 :14 ????++++++++ 100.0%
> >> | yamn3 ?10000001000 :14 ?+++++++++++ 100.0%
> >> | yamn4 ???????10111 :26 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
> >> | yamn2 100100000000 :12 +++++++++++9 99.7%
>
> > Chain: *,*,*,yamn3 Copies=3
>
> -> yamn,yamn1,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
> -> yamn2,yamn,yamn4,yamn3 -> toast
> -> yamn4,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
> -> yamn,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
> -> yamn1,yamn4,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
> ... toast, toast, toast

Some OP said:

"> >But you can manually hardcode chains as long as you don't get
> >too stupid about it."

Four of your five chains are invalid.

Good luck crossing steets. Use walkovers or unders, stay out of
crosswalks.

On 8/31/2021 12:31 AM, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
> In article
> <3deb701d98b10af9feaeff4ed9fc94eb@remailer.paranoici.org>
> Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> | Stats-Version: 2.0
>>>> | Generated: Mon 30 Aug 2021 10:30:02 GMT
>>>> | Mixmaster Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime Options
>>>> | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> | austria ???????10111 :33 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
>>>> | hal ?????0000000 :09 ?????+++++++ 100.0%
>>>> | inwtx 001011000100 :18 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>>>> | lambton ?11111111111 :29 ?+++++++++++ 100.0% D
>>>> | len ????10000000 :09 ????++++++++ 100.0%
>>>> | middleman 101111111101 :31 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>>>> | paranoyamn 011000000000 :13 ++++++++++++ 100.0%
>>>> | tncmm 101111111110 :25 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>>>> | victor ??????111112 :36 ??????++++++ 100.0% D
>>>> | wig ???110111111 :24 ???+++++++++ 100.0% D
>>>> | yamn ????11000000 :14 ????++++++++ 100.0%
>>>> | yamn3 ?10000001000 :14 ?+++++++++++ 100.0%
>>>> | yamn4 ???????10111 :26 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
>>>> | yamn2 100100000000 :12 +++++++++++9 99.7%
>>
>>> Chain: *,*,*,yamn3 Copies=3
>>
>> -> yamn,yamn1,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn2,yamn,yamn4,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn4,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn1,yamn4,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
>> ... toast, toast, toast
>
> Some OP said:
>
> "> >But you can manually hardcode chains as long as you don't get
>>> too stupid about it."
>
> Four of your five chains are invalid.
>

> Good luck crossing steets. Use walkovers or unders, stay out of
> crosswalks.

And be sure you tighten that tinfoil hat.

On 8/30/2021 7:08 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:

>> That's an invention? Don't you think you're setting the bar a little
>> low, as with Mixmaster you also define key lifetime in days, not in
>> years.
>
> | From: Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
> | Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server
> | References: <slrnjpdprj.72l.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at> <v7udp75h40p0ngde84dq9h9qchm3onvmp5@Osama-is-dead.net> <slrnjpdvem.c5g.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at>
> | Subject: Re: austria remailer's keys compromised
> | Message-ID: <b1f9788b07c07ddc3351255e5d7669e4@dizum.com>
> | Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:04:22 +0200 (CEST)
> | Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com
> | Organization: mail2news@dizum.com
> | Xref: news.mixmin.net alt.privacy.anon-server:39878
> |
> | christian mock wrote:
> |
> | >G Morgan <sealteam6@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:
> | >
> | >>>What does this mean?
> | >>
> | >> The US authorities are going to grab an image of every remailer
> | >> drive and break the chain?
> | >
> | >That would only make sense if they seized all remailers at the same
> | >time, or else they risk keys getting wiped in anticipation of their
> | >next move.
> |
> | That's a minor risk. Let's see whether there are remops who renew
> | keys after those incidents. Keys are usually valid for one year.

What are these "incidents" of which you speak?

"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> wrote:

>
>In article
><3deb701d98b10af9feaeff4ed9fc94eb@remailer.paranoici.org>
>Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>>
>> >> | Stats-Version: 2.0
>> >> | Generated: Mon 30 Aug 2021 10:30:02 GMT
>> >> | Mixmaster Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime Options
>> >> | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> | austria ???????10111 :33 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
>> >> | hal ?????0000000 :09 ?????+++++++ 100.0%
>> >> | inwtx 001011000100 :18 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> >> | lambton ?11111111111 :29 ?+++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> >> | len ????10000000 :09 ????++++++++ 100.0%
>> >> | middleman 101111111101 :31 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> >> | paranoyamn 011000000000 :13 ++++++++++++ 100.0%
>> >> | tncmm 101111111110 :25 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>> >> | victor ??????111112 :36 ??????++++++ 100.0% D
>> >> | wig ???110111111 :24 ???+++++++++ 100.0% D
>> >> | yamn ????11000000 :14 ????++++++++ 100.0%
>> >> | yamn3 ?10000001000 :14 ?+++++++++++ 100.0%
>> >> | yamn4 ???????10111 :26 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
>> >> | yamn2 100100000000 :12 +++++++++++9 99.7%
>>
>> > Chain: *,*,*,yamn3 Copies=3
>>
>> -> yamn,yamn1,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn2,yamn,yamn4,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn4,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn1,yamn4,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
>> ... toast, toast, toast
>
>Some OP said:
>
>"> >But you can manually hardcode chains as long as you don't get
>> >too stupid about it."
>
>Four of your five chains are invalid.

-v

>
> In article
> <3deb701d98b10af9feaeff4ed9fc94eb@remailer.paranoici.org>
> Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>>>> Stats-Version: 2.0
>>>>> Generated: Mon 30 Aug 2021 10:30:02 GMT
>>>>> Mixmaster Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime
Options
>>>>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>>>>> austria ???????10111 :33 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
>>>>> hal ?????0000000 :09 ?????+++++++ 100.0%
>>>>> inwtx 001011000100 :18 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>>>>> lambton ?11111111111 :29 ?+++++++++++ 100.0% D
>>>>> len ????10000000 :09 ????++++++++ 100.0%
>>>>> middleman 101111111101 :31 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>>>>> paranoyamn 011000000000 :13 ++++++++++++ 100.0%
>>>>> tncmm 101111111110 :25 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
>>>>> victor ??????111112 :36 ??????++++++ 100.0% D
>>>>> wig ???110111111 :24 ???+++++++++ 100.0% D
>>>>> yamn ????11000000 :14 ????++++++++ 100.0%
>>>>> yamn3 ?10000001000 :14 ?+++++++++++ 100.0%
>>>>> yamn4 ???????10111 :26 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
>>>>> yamn2 100100000000 :12 +++++++++++9 99.7%
>>> Chain: *,*,*,yamn3 Copies=3
>>
>> -> yamn,yamn1,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn2,yamn,yamn4,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn4,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
>> -> yamn1,yamn4,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
>> ... toast, toast, toast
>
> Some OP said:
>
> ">>But you can manually hardcode chains as long as you don't get
>
>>> too stupid about it."
>
> Four of your five chains are invalid.
>
> Good luck crossing steets. Use walkovers or unders, stay out of
> crosswalks.

Maybe he is toasting his successful sends.

Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

>On 8/30/2021 7:08 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
>>> That's an invention? Don't you think you're setting the bar a little
>>> low, as with Mixmaster you also define key lifetime in days, not in
>>> years.
>>
>> | From: Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
>> | Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server
>> | References: <slrnjpdprj.72l.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at> <v7udp75h40p0ngde84dq9h9qchm3onvmp5@Osama-is-dead.net> <slrnjpdvem.c5g.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at>
>> | Subject: Re: austria remailer's keys compromised
>> | Message-ID: <b1f9788b07c07ddc3351255e5d7669e4@dizum.com>
>> | Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:04:22 +0200 (CEST)
>> | Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com
>> | Organization: mail2news@dizum.com
>> | Xref: news.mixmin.net alt.privacy.anon-server:39878
>> |
>> | christian mock wrote:
>> |
>> | >G Morgan <sealteam6@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:
>> | >
>> | >>>What does this mean?
>> | >>
>> | >> The US authorities are going to grab an image of every remailer
>> | >> drive and break the chain?
>> | >
>> | >That would only make sense if they seized all remailers at the same
>> | >time, or else they risk keys getting wiped in anticipation of their
>> | >next move.
>> |
>> | That's a minor risk. Let's see whether there are remops who renew
>> | keys after those incidents. Keys are usually valid for one year.
>
>What are these "incidents" of which you speak?

About a decade ago the server that hosted the 'austria' remailer,
which was involved in an e-mailed bomb threat, was seized by
Austrian authorities at the FBI's instigation.

<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.privacy.anon-server/c/q8oMjdbQg8g>
<https://news.softpedia.com/news/FBI-Pays-Visit-to-Austrian-Remailer-in-Connection-to-Bomb-Threats-266582.shtml>
<https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/04/fbi-seizes-activists-anonymous-remailer-server-in-bomb-threat-investigation/>
<https://www.wired.com/2012/04/fbi-seizes-server/>

Such incidents should pull the trigger for the immediate renewal of
all remailers' keys with a destruction of the old ones shortly
afterwards.

In article <5625c1a042e8d09ff86e26fa80c6b128@dizum.com>
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> On 8/30/2021 7:08 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
> >> That's an invention? Don't you think you're setting the bar a little
> >> low, as with Mixmaster you also define key lifetime in days, not in
> >> years.
> >
> > | From: Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
> > | Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server
> > | References: <slrnjpdprj.72l.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at> <v7udp75h40p0ngde84dq9h9qchm3onvmp5@Osama-is-dead.net> <slrnjpdvem.c5g.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at>
> > | Subject: Re: austria remailer's keys compromised
> > | Message-ID: <b1f9788b07c07ddc3351255e5d7669e4@dizum.com>
> > | Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:04:22 +0200 (CEST)
> > | Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com
> > | Organization: mail2news@dizum.com
> > | Xref: news.mixmin.net alt.privacy.anon-server:39878
> > |
> > | christian mock wrote:
> > |
> > | >G Morgan <sealteam6@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:
> > | >
> > | >>>What does this mean?
> > | >>
> > | >> The US authorities are going to grab an image of every remailer
> > | >> drive and break the chain?
> > | >
> > | >That would only make sense if they seized all remailers at the same
> > | >time, or else they risk keys getting wiped in anticipation of their
> > | >next move.
> > |
> > | That's a minor risk. Let's see whether there are remops who renew
> > | keys after those incidents. Keys are usually valid for one year.
>
> What are these "incidents" of which you speak?

You didn't read the post did you? Give it another go.

In article <sgl65s$j2p$1@news.mixmin.net>
"rmd" <remedy@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>
> >
> > In article
> > <3deb701d98b10af9feaeff4ed9fc94eb@remailer.paranoici.org>
> > Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>>>> Stats-Version: 2.0
> >>>>> Generated: Mon 30 Aug 2021 10:30:02 GMT
> >>>>> Mixmaster Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime
> Options
> >>>>>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> >>>>> austria ???????10111 :33 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
> >>>>> hal ?????0000000 :09 ?????+++++++ 100.0%
> >>>>> inwtx 001011000100 :18 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> >>>>> lambton ?11111111111 :29 ?+++++++++++ 100.0% D
> >>>>> len ????10000000 :09 ????++++++++ 100.0%
> >>>>> middleman 101111111101 :31 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> >>>>> paranoyamn 011000000000 :13 ++++++++++++ 100.0%
> >>>>> tncmm 101111111110 :25 ++++++++++++ 100.0% D
> >>>>> victor ??????111112 :36 ??????++++++ 100.0% D
> >>>>> wig ???110111111 :24 ???+++++++++ 100.0% D
> >>>>> yamn ????11000000 :14 ????++++++++ 100.0%
> >>>>> yamn3 ?10000001000 :14 ?+++++++++++ 100.0%
> >>>>> yamn4 ???????10111 :26 ???????+++++ 100.0% D
> >>>>> yamn2 100100000000 :12 +++++++++++9 99.7%
> >>> Chain: *,*,*,yamn3 Copies=3
> >>
> >> -> yamn,yamn1,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
> >> -> yamn2,yamn,yamn4,yamn3 -> toast
> >> -> yamn4,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
> >> -> yamn,yamn2,yamn1,yamn3 -> toast
> >> -> yamn1,yamn4,yamn2,yamn3 -> toast
> >> ... toast, toast, toast
> >
> > Some OP said:
> >
> > ">>But you can manually hardcode chains as long as you don't get
> >
> >>> too stupid about it."
> >
> > Four of your five chains are invalid.
> >
> > Good luck crossing steets. Use walkovers or unders, stay out of
> > crosswalks.
>
> Maybe he is toasting his successful sends.

now that was funny

In article <2b0452b164fd1f71d202fb2bbe86df56@dizum.com>
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> >On 8/30/2021 7:08 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> >
> >>> That's an invention? Don't you think you're setting the bar a little
> >>> low, as with Mixmaster you also define key lifetime in days, not in
> >>> years.
> >>
> >> | From: Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
> >> | Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server
> >> | References: <slrnjpdprj.72l.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at> <v7udp75h40p0ngde84dq9h9qchm3onvmp5@Osama-is-dead.net> <slrnjpdvem.c5g.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at>
> >> | Subject: Re: austria remailer's keys compromised
> >> | Message-ID: <b1f9788b07c07ddc3351255e5d7669e4@dizum.com>
> >> | Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:04:22 +0200 (CEST)
> >> | Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com
> >> | Organization: mail2news@dizum.com
> >> | Xref: news.mixmin.net alt.privacy.anon-server:39878
> >> |
> >> | christian mock wrote:
> >> |
> >> | >G Morgan <sealteam6@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:
> >> | >
> >> | >>>What does this mean?
> >> | >>
> >> | >> The US authorities are going to grab an image of every remailer
> >> | >> drive and break the chain?
> >> | >
> >> | >That would only make sense if they seized all remailers at the same
> >> | >time, or else they risk keys getting wiped in anticipation of their
> >> | >next move.
> >> |
> >> | That's a minor risk. Let's see whether there are remops who renew
> >> | keys after those incidents. Keys are usually valid for one year.
> >
> >What are these "incidents" of which you speak?
>
> About a decade ago the server that hosted the 'austria' remailer,
> which was involved in an e-mailed bomb threat, was seized by
> Austrian authorities at the FBI's instigation.
>
> <https://groups.google.com/g/alt.privacy.anon-server/c/q8oMjdbQg8g>
> <https://news.softpedia.com/news/FBI-Pays-Visit-to-Austrian-Remailer-in-Connection-to-Bomb-Threats-266582.shtml>
> <https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/04/fbi-seizes-activists-anonymous-remailer-server-in-bomb-threat-investigation/>
> <https://www.wired.com/2012/04/fbi-seizes-server/>
>
> Such incidents should pull the trigger for the immediate renewal of
> all remailers' keys with a destruction of the old ones shortly
> afterwards.

A couple of spiteful fags were responsible for the bomb threats
over toilet access. One of them is a well-known Usenet abuser
named Seamus. Yes THAT Seamus.

Bomb threats at Penn State are nothing new. It happens all the
time.

In article <053636bbb9f2c0a429f9b8b0e1e1a8ca@remailer.privacy.at>
"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at>
wrote:
>
>
> In article <2b0452b164fd1f71d202fb2bbe86df56@dizum.com>
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> >
> > Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> >
> > >On 8/30/2021 7:08 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > >
> > >>> That's an invention? Don't you think you're setting the bar a little
> > >>> low, as with Mixmaster you also define key lifetime in days, not in
> > >>> years.
> > >>
> > >> | From: Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
> > >> | Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server
> > >> | References: <slrnjpdprj.72l.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at> <v7udp75h40p0ngde84dq9h9qchm3onvmp5@Osama-is-dead.net> <slrnjpdvem.c5g.cm@erl.tahina.priv.at>
> > >> | Subject: Re: austria remailer's keys compromised
> > >> | Message-ID: <b1f9788b07c07ddc3351255e5d7669e4@dizum.com>
> > >> | Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:04:22 +0200 (CEST)
> > >> | Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com
> > >> | Organization: mail2news@dizum.com
> > >> | Xref: news.mixmin.net alt.privacy.anon-server:39878
> > >> |
> > >> | christian mock wrote:
> > >> |
> > >> | >G Morgan <sealteam6@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:
> > >> | >
> > >> | >>>What does this mean?
> > >> | >>
> > >> | >> The US authorities are going to grab an image of every remailer
> > >> | >> drive and break the chain?
> > >> | >
> > >> | >That would only make sense if they seized all remailers at the same
> > >> | >time, or else they risk keys getting wiped in anticipation of their
> > >> | >next move.
> > >> |
> > >> | That's a minor risk. Let's see whether there are remops who renew
> > >> | keys after those incidents. Keys are usually valid for one year.
> > >
> > >What are these "incidents" of which you speak?
> >
> > About a decade ago the server that hosted the 'austria' remailer,
> > which was involved in an e-mailed bomb threat, was seized by
> > Austrian authorities at the FBI's instigation.
> >
> > <https://groups.google.com/g/alt.privacy.anon-server/c/q8oMjdbQg8g>
> > <https://news.softpedia.com/news/FBI-Pays-Visit-to-Austrian-Remailer-in-Connection-to-Bomb-Threats-266582.shtml>
> > <https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/04/fbi-seizes-activists-anonymous-remailer-server-in-bomb-threat-investigation/>
> > <https://www.wired.com/2012/04/fbi-seizes-server/>
> >
> > Such incidents should pull the trigger for the immediate renewal of
> > all remailers' keys with a destruction of the old ones shortly
> > afterwards.
>
> A couple of spiteful fags were responsible for the bomb threats
> over toilet access. One of them is a well-known Usenet abuser
> named Seamus. Yes THAT Seamus.

Let's help him achieve his goal of becoming a woman by removing
his penis with garden clippers.

> Bomb threats at Penn State are nothing new. It happens all the
> time.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Sun, 29 Aug 2021 19:51:07 -0400, SEC3 wrote in
Message-Id: <N3VWI.966062$Jv1.514157@fx07.ams1>:

>> yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn2@mixmin.net
>>
>> The 1st hope was specified by me, the 2nd one was chosen by YAMN.
>>
>> yamn.cfg:
>>
>> [Stats]
>> Minrel=98.5
>> Relfinal=98.5
>> Distance=3
>
> "Distance" is not a valid setting in YAMN.
Distance is a valid setting and it is defined in the Stats section.

> My experience with YAMN has taught me that it doesn't behave well when
> you try and hardcode your chains.
Chain selection is probably the trickiest thing to get right and it's
quite likely there are bugs in the current implementation (the OP
appears to be seeing one).

The main problem is deciding how to behave when the remailers available
(and their stats) cannot fulfil the user's configuration requirements.
Mixmaster fails in these circumstances with "No remailers available".
Yamn has a plethora of error messages that attempt to explain the
problem and (in some instances) will relax stats requirements to try and
find more remailers meeting the desired criteria.

> Just let it pick some randoms for you and it will. It will also pick an
> exit for your last remailer, so you don't have to concern yourself with
> that.
>
> *,*,*,* is the chain that I would suggest you use.
This is good advise but I'd still like Yamn to behave as well as
possible to reasonable user configurations. I'll try and take a look at
it. Moving the whole chain creation process to a dedicated package and
adding some tests would be a good start.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=3AGZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
pub 1024D/228761E7 2003-06-04 Steven Crook <steve@mixmin.net>
Key fingerprint = 1CD9 95E1 E9CE 80D6 C885 B7EB B471 80D5 2287 61E7
ssb rsa4096/832C8F4DCD904263 created: 2019-05-04 expires: 2024-05-02 usage: S

Zax <admin@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On Sun, 29 Aug 2021 19:51:07 -0400, SEC3 wrote in
> Message-Id: <N3VWI.966062$Jv1.514157@fx07.ams1>:
>
> >> yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn@remailer.privacy.at,yamn2@mixmin.net
> >>
> >> The 1st hope was specified by me, the 2nd one was chosen by YAMN.
> >>
> >> yamn.cfg:
> >>
> >> [Stats]
> >> Minrel=98.5
> >> Relfinal=98.5
> >> Distance=3
> >
> > "Distance" is not a valid setting in YAMN.
>
> Distance is a valid setting and it is defined in the Stats section.
>
>
> > SNIPP
> >
> > *,*,*,* is the chain that I would suggest you use.
> This is good advise but I'd still like Yamn to behave as well as
> possible to reasonable user configurations. I'll try and take a look at
> it. Moving the whole chain creation process to a dedicated package and
> adding some tests would be a good start.
>

Thank you so much.

In article <slrnsji7l0.fqr.admin@fleegle.mixmin.net>
Zax <admin@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
> Moving the whole chain creation process to a dedicated package and
> adding some tests would be a good start.

Thank you for fixing the bug.

In article <slrnsji7l0.fqr.admin@fleegle.mixmin.net>
Zax <admin@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
> The main problem is deciding how to behave when the remailers available
> (and their stats) cannot fulfil the user's configuration requirements.
> Mixmaster fails in these circumstances with "No remailers available".
> Yamn has a plethora of error messages that attempt to explain the
> problem and (in some instances) will relax stats requirements to try and
> find more remailers meeting the desired criteria.
>
> > *,*,*,* is the chain that I would suggest you use.
> This is good advise but I'd still like Yamn to behave as well as
> possible to reasonable user configurations. I'll try and take a look at
> it. Moving the whole chain creation process to a dedicated package and
> adding some tests would be a good start.

Hi,

also picking up some randoms remailer always only the first remailer changes.
Only the dummy is using diverent remailer.

Info: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 chain.go:36: Stats updated and reimported
Info: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:172:
*Chain:
yamn@mix
1.remail
er.xyz,yamn@middleman.remailer.online,yamn2@mixmin.net,yamn@mix1.remailer.xyz*
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:228: Encrypting Final Hop:
Hop=yamn@mix1.remailer.xyz, KeyID=e3dd4bd7f418334dc46b28492849c6c8
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting: Hop=yamn2@mixmin.net,
KeyID=2477df1042cc8cd4776f93c4314c2fc6
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting:
Hop=yamn@middleman.remailer.online, KeyID=8c7e5566995ae9405b9891078f5511df
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting: Hop=yamn@mix1.remailer.xyz,
KeyID=e3dd4bd7f418334dc46b28492849c6c8
Info: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:172:
*Chain:
yamn@yam
n.parano
ici.org,yamn@middleman.remailer.online,yamn2@mixmin.net,yamn@mix1.remailer.xyz*
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:228: Encrypting Final Hop:
Hop=yamn@mix1.remailer.xyz, KeyID=e3dd4bd7f418334dc46b28492849c6c8
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting: Hop=yamn2@mixmin.net,
KeyID=2477df1042cc8cd4776f93c4314c2fc6
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting:
Hop=yamn@middleman.remailer.online, KeyID=8c7e5566995ae9405b9891078f5511df
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting:
Hop=yamn@yamn.paranoici.org, KeyID=6a46a517e3366e3e136f26b876454de0
Info: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:172:
*Chain:
yamn@mix
2.remail
er.xyz,yamn@middleman.remailer.online,yamn2@mixmin.net,yamn@mix1.remailer.xyz*
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:228: Encrypting Final Hop:
Hop=yamn@mix1.remailer.xyz, KeyID=e3dd4bd7f418334dc46b28492849c6c8
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting: Hop=yamn2@mixmin.net,
KeyID=2477df1042cc8cd4776f93c4314c2fc6
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting:
Hop=yamn@middleman.remailer.online, KeyID=8c7e5566995ae9405b9891078f5511df
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting: Hop=yamn@mix2.remailer.xyz,
KeyID=12ae1d651de452cbeba31d4e710b0599

Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:350: Sending dummy through:
yamn@yamn.paranoici.org,yamn@mix1.remailer.xyz,yamn@tnetconsultin
g.net,yamn@mixmin.net.
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:228: Encrypting Final Hop:
Hop=yamn@mixmin.net, KeyID=8f652b81dd69e5dfb1c7a9626b6f7a46
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting:
Hop=yamn@tnetconsulting.net, KeyID=b42cffbfb4f026ce3b073a8202df8c8b
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting: Hop=yamn@mix1.remailer.xyz,
KeyID=e3dd4bd7f418334dc46b28492849c6c8
Trace: 2021/09/17 16:37:03 client.go:281: Encrypting:
Hop=yamn@yamn.paranoici.org, KeyID=6a46a517e3366e3e136f26b876454de0

I'm using the yamn.exe 2021-07-03 19:14 8.4M from your page.