# [freehaven-dev] Got China questions?

Hi all.  I'm meeting with Lin Hai tomorrow, who was involved in his own
horrorstory over Chinese Internet law last year (check google or just the
dfn site).  Guy works in computers and is interested in Red Rover.  If
anyone has any questions they'd like me to ask him--techie stuff I wouldn't
think of, e.g.--please email me before 2:30 tomorrow at nlogn@iname.com

Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael J Freedman <mfreed@MIT.EDU>
To: freehaven-dev@freehaven.net <freehaven-dev@freehaven.net>
Date: Monday, March 05, 2001 4:03 PM
Subject: [freehaven-dev] Brief notation explanation on Anon network email

>>ROUTE_CREATE_PACKET
>>
>>
>>[K_s_1, K_d_1 {K_s_2, K_d_2 (K_M, K_d_2, K_d_1, K_A)_PK_M}_PK_2]_PK_1
>>
>>Message
>>
>>      [{(MSG)_K_M}_K_s_2]_K_s_1
>>
>>
>>Packet:   {routing info} o {message}
>
>Just to clear up any confusion that might exist with notation, this
>describes some "onion encryption" packet.  That is,
>
> (K_M, K_d_2, K_d_1, K_A)_{PK_M}
>
>is the message block (K_M, K_{d_2}, K_{d_1}, K_A) encrypted under PK_M.
>Therefore, other possible notation for the above formula is the following:
>
>PACKET-M = E_{PK_M} ( K_M, K_{d_2}, K_{d_1}, K_A)
>PACKET-2 = E_{PK_2} ( K_{s_2}, K_{d_2}, PACKET-M)
>PACKET-1 = E_{PK_1} ( K_{s_1}, K_{d_1}, PACKET-2)
>
>Alice sends PACKET-1 to 1
>
>Hope that is clearer.  It's the fairly standard onion-encryption idea of
>many "mix-nets".  Sorry for the formatting problems with my previous email
>and any unclear language (such as "protectation from reply" --> "protection
>from replay attacks", and such ilk.)
>
>Enjoy!
>--mike
>
>
>
>
>
>-----
>"Not all those who wander are lost."                  mfreed@mit.edu
>
>
>
>
>
>

Shop online without a credit card
http://www.rocketcash.com
RocketCash, a NetZero subsidiary