Re: [Spam] neodome [Spam] back [Spam] to [Spam] the [Spam] same [Spam] shit.

On 26 Oct 2025, Radio Eriwan <[email protected]> posted some
news:[email protected]: 

> A pretty much lying Fritz Wuehler user wrote:
>> Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On 25 Oct 2025, Radio Eriwan <[email protected]> posted
>> > some news:[email protected]: 
>> > 
>> > > Fritz Wuehler once wrote, without thinking too much beforehand:
>> > > > Radio Claashole <[email protected]> sent:
>> > > > > A stupid YAMN user wrote:
>> > > > > > Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > > > > > On 24 Oct 2025, Anonymous <[email protected]>
>> > > > > > > posted some
>> > > > > > > news:[email protected]: 
>> > > > > > > 
>> > > > > > > > [Spam] same [Spam] censoring [Spam] shit [Spam]
>> > > > > > > > different [Spam]. 
>> > > > > > > > 
>> > > > > > > > Apparently it's okay for a particular sporging asshole
>> > > > > > > > to destroy groups and services for all, but not okay to
>> > > > > > > > use YAMN / neodome to counter the jerk.
>> > > > > > > 
>> > > > > > > yamn is not so anonymous after all.  
>> > > > > > > 
>> > > > > > > what does that say about "anonymous messaging" hmm?
>> > > > > > 
>> > > > > > Tor is an unsecure real-time system.
>> > > > > > Type I remailing fails to hide message size.
>> > > > > > Only Type II remailing (Mixmaster / YAMN) is secure!
>> > > > > > 
>> > > > > 
>> > > > > Did you know that YAMN/OmniMix users are the dumbest Usenet
>> > > > > users? 
>> > > > 
>> > > >   We just know that you, fascist Claas, and your buddy GabX are
>> > > >   the 
>> > > > stupidest snake oil peddlers over here ignoring even the most
>> > > > basic principles of secure anonymous remailing. Good luck to
>> > > > your victims. 
>> > > > 
>> > > 
>> > > Ah, ok. So pseudonymous remailing with Mixmaster and YAMN, in
>> > > your eyes, is secure 'anonymous' remailing. Mind you, you must
>> > > use Tor or you would shit in your pants without it. So much for
>> > > TypeII 'anonymous' remailing. 
>> > 
>> > It all works with Tor.   No Tor, no work.  
>> 
>> Remailers don't need Tor at all.  Tor was developed long after the
>> invention of anonymous remailing in order to have something similar
>> for from the anonymity perspective inherently problematic real-time
>> (web) communication.
>> 
>> You send some packets to the entry remailer and nobody can figure out
>> which mail message at some exit remailer they represent, if any, as
>> you just may have sent dummy packets. That isn't pseudonymity, it's
>> true anonymity no matter what shithead Claas tells you.
>> 
> 
> I think you are the liar and real shithead! Why? Because these
> pseudonymous remailers are publicity run and known as old fashioned
> TypeII clearnet smtp networks where Eve and her friends only need to
> append the secret keys from remailers, to decrypt the incomming
> messages at an entry.  This can be done with gag orders. If you would
> know how the internals work from such old and outdated TypeII
> technology you would not speak such rubbish. 

the intent is that the content be publicly published in the first place 
while concealing the sender.  this is accomplished, no?

> And secondly when looking at the pools Eve and her friends see in
> clear the remailer packets and the To: header, while messages at exits
> are held in an decrypted state.

they are sent in a decrypted state from the exit as designed, otherwise 
they would not appear as useful.