On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Michael Rogers wrote:
> On 25/11/14 12:45, George Kadianakis wrote:
>> Yes, integrating low-latency with high-latency anonymity is a very
>> interesting probleml. Unfortunately, I haven't had any time to
>> think about it.
>>
>> For people who want to think about it
I’m interested in helping out with this, mostly because we’ll want it for Pond
: https://pond.imperialviolet.org/
I’ve read the alpha-mixing paper, but not the others, so I’ll check em’ out.
Jeff
On 9 Dec 2014, at 16:40, Michael Rogers wrote:
> Signed PGP part
> On 25/11/14 12:45, George
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 25/11/14 12:45, George Kadianakis wrote:
> Yes, integrating low-latency with high-latency anonymity is a very
> interesting probleml. Unfortunately, I haven't had any time to
> think about it.
>
> For people who want to think about it there is t
> This indeed seems plausible under the powerful assumption that the
> underlying stat is constant.
Actually it applies to any known relative pattern, for example, that the number
increases by 1 each time.
> where the additive noise is applied to the center of the first bin?
Yes, you can look a
"A. Johnson" writes:
> Hi George,
>
Hello!
> I recommend a change to the way that these statistics are
> obfuscated. The problem is that new noise is used every day, and from
> the distribution of the reported bins, the exact location within the
> bin (assuming the stat stats constant) can be r
Hi George,
I recommend a change to the way that these statistics are obfuscated. The
problem is that new noise is used every day, and from the distribution of the
reported bins, the exact location within the bin (assuming the stat stats
constant) can be reported.
So instead of this
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/12/14 00:26, Anna Kornfeld Simpson wrote:
> Thanks all for the responses!
>
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Sebastian Hahn
> wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> On 21 Nov 2014, at 23:44, Damian Johnson
>> wrote:
In other words, if I sorted t
