In article
<4bfe12d375ede46cf5f23ad3ebd64b0b@remailer.paranoici.org>
Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>
> >As the messages are encrypted and IP of origin obfuscated by any
> >number of transports prior to arrival, why do you care?
>
> If that's your point, why in the first place do you ever use remailers?

Because email doesn't always travel directly from point of
origin to destination.

As it passes through conventional email servers, it leaves an
accumulating header trail.

Passing through remailers it does not.

In article
<039468c6896e220286f36bcdf6fe384d@remailer.paranoici.org>
Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>
> SEC3 <admin@sec3.net> wrote:
>
> >On 2021-08-31 3:57 p.m., Anonymous wrote:
> >> On 8/31/2021 12:47 PM, Anonymous Remailer wrote:
> >>
> >>>> This issue is clearly important to you. Why not do something
> >>> contructive about it? Maybe you can maintain a list of remailers -
> >>> both Mixmaster and Yamn - that are operated by the same person. Host
> >>> the file somewhere. Google Drive. Microsoft OneDrive. Mega.io.
> >>> Github. Keybase.io
> >>>> There are hundreds of filehosting websites. Or post your list
> >>> regularly to apa-s.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> � What? Who me?
> >>
> >>
> >> Looks like it's your day in the barrel.
> >>
> >
> >My suggestion to the poster who was concerned about multiple remailers
> >operated by one person wasn't meant as an attack. You needn't
> >interpreted that way. I wasn't putting him in a barrel (a reference to a
> >very old homophobic joke about sailors in need of sex.) After all,
> >remops are just remailer users who decided to give back to the community.
>
> But I doubt remailer users honour a surprise package never knowing
> whether it contains a time bomb.

I gift my neighbors all surprise packages. Only one blew up.

In article <d8b48adbade25ec0454bb1bcfe79c31e@remailer.privacy.at>
"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at>
wrote:
>
>
> In article
> <f327691084c25ec3e80c3b811c31721f@remailer.paranoici.org>
> Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 12:59:02 +0200 (CEST), in article
> > <4609ef9f0dcc866781149112987e6ec8@remailer.privacy.at> "Anonymous
> > Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >In article <5b10658c6ef201644a15b68288701525@dizum.com>
> > >Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> In article <sglpsr$4n1$1@news.mixmin.net> "rmd"
> > >> <remedy@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> In article <tJrXI.5936$Ki4b.4252@fx05.ams1> SEC3 wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> On 2021-08-31 6:12 a.m., Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>>> BTW, with the announcement of a new remailer shouldn't it become
> > >> >>>> mandatory to disclose the names of all other remailers of the
> > >> >>>> respective kind (Type 1 / Type 2 / Yamn), also run by the
> > >> >>>> respective remop or his team? That would make it much easier
> > >> >for
> > >> >>>> users to update their starex configuration accordingly. Thanks.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Traditionally, the place where that information is shared is on
> > >> >the
> > >> >>> stats pages. Echolot operators can (optionally) create a file
> > >> >called
> > >> >>> sameop.txt. In it they would list remailers that are operated by
> > >> >the
> > >> >>> same person or that are located on the same box. And that list
> > >> >would get
> > >> >>> published on their stats pages. Example:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> (hsub banana slow)
> > >> >>> (devurandom krautrelay)
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> But very few pinger operators use sameop.txt. And even fewer keep
> > >> >the
> > >> >>> list up to date. Look at how comically outdated the Deupi
> > >> >Pinger's
> > >> >>> sameop is:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> <https://www.deuxpi.ca/echolot/mlist.html>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> smelly ??
> > >> >>
> > >> >> That's why at least with the introduction of any remailer we need
> > >> >> transparency on the part of the remop. Would you agree that it's
> > >> >> just unfair to announce a new service but hold back that essential
> > >> >> information on potential collaboration?
> > >> >
> > >> > So how are you going to verify any stated transparency of the
> > >> >remop? Some people tend to be private individuals. Zax is one of
> > >> >the few transparent remailers in here. Do remailers want some crazy
> > >> >banging on their door asking why they sent them a threatening email?
> > >> > There are several reasons that remops insist on being incognito.
> > >>
> > >> Mr Incognito, do you honestly think a threatening mail can't be traced
> > >> bak to its originating exit remailer with the responsible operator?
> > >
> > >That's the whole point of being an exit, slick. We all KNOW,
> > >it's going to come out somewhere and there will be no doubt of
> > >the exit identity.
> >
> > The exit identity and the identity of all remailers that exchange data
> > with it.
> >
> > So you agree, that remops can in no way be incognito towards officials
> > and thereby obscuring remailer pooling only fools the uninformed
> > ordinary user, who in the first place deserves transparency in this
> > respect, as he's the one who risks being compromised by remailer chains
> > completely in one hand? Playing games makes no sense here.
>
> Very simple. The remop isn't the sender and doesn't have any
> way to know who is.

The entry remailer will always know point of origin.

If point of entry is over Tor, you are relatively safe.

IF you do not use a VPN or Tor and send directly to an entry
remailer using port 25, 2525 or 587, you have outed your IP
address and hostname to the remop and have to trust he does not
log.

TKS

SEC3, could you please be so kind and accept TOR connections to your remailer.

On 2021-09-03 10:25 p.m., Anonymous wrote:
> SEC3, could you please be so kind and accept TOR connections to your remailer.

I'm unsure how to do that. Will you explain how?

--
SEC3

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

On 2021-09-03 10:25 p.m., Anonymous wrote:
> SEC3, could you please be so kind and accept TOR connections to your remailer.

This would involve creating an smtp tor hidden service at mixport.net,
correct? Something that looks like this?

rfzffxp3dtwbcvrx3w7rfb672ghj23lpthwexi7s6gbs7omjuj2azjid.onion

--
SEC3

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

SEC3 <admin@sec3.net> wrote:
>
> On 2021-09-03 10:25 p.m., Anonymous wrote:
> > SEC3, could you please be so kind and accept TOR connections to your remailer.
>
> This would involve creating an smtp tor hidden service at mixport.net,
> correct?

I don't think so. Some remailer accept connections via TOR
without having a TOR address.

How to do that? I don't know. :-(

> Something that looks like this?
>
> rfzffxp3dtwbcvrx3w7rfb672ghj23lpthwexi7s6gbs7omjuj2azjid.onion

A smtp tor hidden service would be great. :)

On Saturday, September 4, 2021 at 8:39:46 PM UTC+2, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> SEC3 <ad...@sec3.net> wrote:
> >
> > On 2021-09-03 10:25 p.m., Anonymous wrote:
> > > SEC3, could you please be so kind and accept TOR connections to your remailer.
> >
> > This would involve creating an smtp tor hidden service at mixport.net,
> > correct?
> I don't think so. Some remailer accept connections via TOR
> without having a TOR address.
>
> How to do that? I don't know. :-(

An operator simply has to open in postfix's main.cf an additional port,
like the commonly used port 2525, because most Tor exits block port 25.

> > Something that looks like this?
> >
> > rfzffxp3dtwbcvrx3w7rfb672ghj23lpthwexi7s6gbs7omjuj2azjid.onion
> A smtp tor hidden service would be great. :)

The only advantage I remember was, when testing this out, that a remop
would not see in mail logs (in case he has) from which Tor exit node the
message(s) orignated from. With an .onion service IIRC the remop, in case
he would log, would then see the local IP address 127.0.0.1 in the log file.
But don't quote me on this.

Regards
Stefan

On Saturday, September 4, 2021 at 9:05:59 PM UTC+2, Stefan Claas wrote:
> On Saturday, September 4, 2021 at 8:39:46 PM UTC+2, Nomen Nescio wrote:

> > > rfzffxp3dtwbcvrx3w7rfb672ghj23lpthwexi7s6gbs7omjuj2azjid.onion
> > A smtp tor hidden service would be great. :)
> The only advantage I remember was, when testing this out, that a remop
> would not see in mail logs (in case he has) from which Tor exit node the
> message(s) orignated from. With an .onion service IIRC the remop, in case
> he would log, would then see the local IP address 127.0.0.1 in the log file.
> But don't quote me on this.

Ouch, you meant something else ... sorry!

Regards
Stefan

On 9/4/21 12:39 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> I don't think so. Some remailer accept connections via TOR without
> having a TOR address.

Please elaborate.

Are you referring to a Remailer allowing or disallowing connections that
originate via a Tor Exit Node? -- I can see how this can be done
without a Tor .onion address.

Or are you referring to accessing the Remailer via a .onion address? --
I don't see how this can be done /without/ a Tor .onion address.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

In article <CNBYI.33421$ya7f.31913@fx10.ams1>
SEC3 <admin@sec3.net> wrote:
>
> On 2021-09-03 10:25 p.m., Anonymous wrote:
> > SEC3, could you please be so kind and accept TOR connections to your remailer.
>
> This would involve creating an smtp tor hidden service at mixport.net,
> correct? Something that looks like this?
>
> rfzffxp3dtwbcvrx3w7rfb672ghj23lpthwexi7s6gbs7omjuj2azjid.onion

Probably what the op is requesting because they don't know how
to send mail through it directly over Tor.

>From the previous post sent via orange over Tor.

Connecting...
220 orange.mixport.net ESMTP Postfix (Debian/GNU)
250 orange.mixport.net
250 2.1.0 Ok
250 2.1.5 Ok
354 End data with <CR><LF>.<CR><LF>
250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as EA790408F8
221 2.0.0 Bye
Connection closed!

This post will also be via orange over Tor.

In article
<eaf8a39bf8c12087b1faefe8e3ae62d3@remailer.paranoici.org>
Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>
> SEC3, could you please be so kind and accept TOR connections to your remailer.

A Tor connection works perfectly to the orange remailer. I just
sent this through it.

In article <31fe07662e2a108688bd97f9f2cff88b@remailer.privacy.at>
"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at>
wrote:
>
>
> In article <CNBYI.33421$ya7f.31913@fx10.ams1>
> SEC3 <admin@sec3.net> wrote:
> >
> > On 2021-09-03 10:25 p.m., Anonymous wrote:
> > > SEC3, could you please be so kind and accept TOR connections to your remailer.
> >
> > This would involve creating an smtp tor hidden service at mixport.net,
> > correct? Something that looks like this?
> >
> > rfzffxp3dtwbcvrx3w7rfb672ghj23lpthwexi7s6gbs7omjuj2azjid.onion
>
> Probably what the op is requesting because they don't know how
> to send mail through it directly over Tor.
>
> >From the previous post sent via orange over Tor.
>
> Connecting...
> 220 orange.mixport.net ESMTP Postfix (Debian/GNU)
> 250 orange.mixport.net
> 250 2.1.0 Ok
> 250 2.1.5 Ok
> 354 End data with <CR><LF>.<CR><LF>
> 250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as EA790408F8
> 221 2.0.0 Bye
> Connection closed!
>
> This post will also be via orange over Tor.

That was a very fast post. This reply via orange over Tor.

In article <1a2c63f87a43ec3af442556721733ca3@remailer.privacy.at>
"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at>
wrote:
>
>
> In article
> <eaf8a39bf8c12087b1faefe8e3ae62d3@remailer.paranoici.org>
> Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
> >
> > SEC3, could you please be so kind and accept TOR connections to your remailer.
>
> A Tor connection works perfectly to the orange remailer. I just
> sent this through it.

Again a very fast post via orange over Tor.

In article <03fa2071-a1ea-4b51-aa1a-
d4bb7a1c306cn@googlegroups.com>
Stefan Claas <spam.trap.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, September 4, 2021 at 9:05:59 PM UTC+2, Stefan Claas wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 4, 2021 at 8:39:46 PM UTC+2, Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
> > > > rfzffxp3dtwbcvrx3w7rfb672ghj23lpthwexi7s6gbs7omjuj2azjid.onion
> > > A smtp tor hidden service would be great. :)
> > The only advantage I remember was, when testing this out, that a remop
> > would not see in mail logs (in case he has) from which Tor exit node the
> > message(s) orignated from. With an .onion service IIRC the remop, in case
> > he would log, would then see the local IP address 127.0.0.1 in the log file.
> > But don't quote me on this.
>
> Ouch, you meant something else ... sorry!

Yes the op is asking for an onion service.

You can send posts via orange over Tor just fine without onion
if you want.

Connecting...
220 orange.mixport.net ESMTP Postfix (Debian/GNU)
250 orange.mixport.net
250 2.1.0 Ok
250 2.1.5 Ok
354 End data with <CR><LF>.<CR><LF>
250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as C4DE2408EF
221 2.0.0 Bye
Connection closed!

In article <sh1lj7$kcq$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net>
Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:
>
> On 9/4/21 12:39 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > I don't think so. Some remailer accept connections via TOR without
> > having a TOR address.
>
> Please elaborate.
>
> Are you referring to a Remailer allowing or disallowing connections that
> originate via a Tor Exit Node? -- I can see how this can be done
> without a Tor .onion address.
>
> Or are you referring to accessing the Remailer via a .onion address? --
> I don't see how this can be done /without/ a Tor .onion address.

Easy enough.

Template. Enable Tor proxy. Works fine.

Host: orange.mixport.net
Chain: orange,*,*,*; copies=4;

Connecting...
220 orange.mixport.net ESMTP Postfix (Debian/GNU)
250 orange.mixport.net
250 2.1.0 Ok
250 2.1.5 Ok
354 End data with <CR><LF>.<CR><LF>
250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as E1ADE408EF
221 2.0.0 Bye
Connection closed!

In article <03fa2071-a1ea-4b51-aa1a-
d4bb7a1c306cn@googlegroups.com>
Stefan Claas <spam.trap.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, September 4, 2021 at 9:05:59 PM UTC+2, Stefan Claas wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 4, 2021 at 8:39:46 PM UTC+2, Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
> > > > rfzffxp3dtwbcvrx3w7rfb672ghj23lpthwexi7s6gbs7omjuj2azjid.onion
> > > A smtp tor hidden service would be great. :)
> > The only advantage I remember was, when testing this out, that a remop
> > would not see in mail logs (in case he has) from which Tor exit node the
> > message(s) orignated from. With an .onion service IIRC the remop, in case
> > he would log, would then see the local IP address 127.0.0.1 in the log file.
> > But don't quote me on this.
>
> Ouch, you meant something else ... sorry!

Yes the op is asking for an onion service.

You can send posts via orange over Tor just fine without onion
if you want.

Connecting...
220 orange.mixport.net ESMTP Postfix (Debian/GNU)
250 orange.mixport.net
250 2.1.0 Ok
250 2.1.5 Ok
354 End data with <CR><LF>.<CR><LF>
250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as C4DE2408EF
221 2.0.0 Bye
Connection closed!