When you get a reply back from the nymserver in your mail client
confirming the nym is active, it appears in cleartext. So OmniMix
auto decrypts the message with your secret mantra then sends it to
the mail client?

Yamn Remailer <remailer@domain.invalid> wrote:

> When you get a reply back from the nymserver in your mail client
> confirming the nym is active, it appears in cleartext. So OmniMix
> auto decrypts the message with your secret mantra then sends it to
> the mail client?

Correct. Complete i/o automation.

The Nym log list shows all these steps. OM can also maintain a nym log
file (Log > Msg > Save Nym Output to a Log File). And the incoming
encrypted message can be stored as well (SetNym > Data > Message Dir).

Yamn Remailer wrote:
>When you get a reply back from the nymserver in your mail client
>confirming the nym is active, it appears in cleartext. So OmniMix
>auto decrypts the message with your secret mantra then sends it to
>the mail client?
Yes, that's how it ought to work.
Does that mean, your OM problems are solved and, after sending
a confirmation message, you finally got a reply reporting the
activation of your nym?

On Sun 4 Jun 2023 10:58 pm, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> Yamn Remailer wrote:
>> When you get a reply back from the nymserver in your mail client
>> confirming the nym is active, it appears in cleartext. So OmniMix
>> auto decrypts the message with your secret mantra then sends it to
>> the mail client?
> Yes, that's how it ought to work.
> Does that mean, your OM problems are solved and, after sending
> a confirmation message, you finally got a reply reporting the
> activation of your nym?
>
Yes, I had a confirm message, not sure if my OM problems
are solved. Its complexity means there will probably be
more puzzles to solve later.

The question was also a comparison to QSL where the recipient has to
manually decrypt the incoming messages in QSAAM.

> By setting your username in TB to "omnimix;pl=N" you avoid that
> failing normal POP3 connection attempt, which may reveal your OM
> activities."

That didn't seem to change anything in the log, so I changed back to,
User Name: omnimix

BTW, even with an active nym, the logs are the same,

"P Connection with external POP3 server failed "

but when a message is passed on from Hamster it
is retrieved correctly in OM and goes to TB.
So I guess the setup was right all along.
Thanks.

In article <20230605.064537.2c4f8df4@mixmin.net> Yamn Remailer wrote:
>On Sun 4 Jun 2023 10:58 pm, Nomen Nescio wrote:

>Yes, I had a confirm message, not sure if my OM problems
>are solved. Its complexity means there will probably be
>more puzzles to solve later.

In my early stages I often used OM's simulation mode to check processing
of messages to be sent, particularly glancing over the Log and Raw Data
list.

>
>The question was also a comparison to QSL where the recipient has to
>manually decrypt the incoming messages in QSAAM.

That's the big advantage of OM. After the initial system setup and nym
creation no additional work has to be done and you can stay within your
mail client.

>
> > By setting your username in TB to "omnimix;pl=N" you avoid that
> > failing normal POP3 connection attempt, which may reveal your OM
> > activities."
>
>That didn't seem to change anything in the log, so I changed back to,
>User Name: omnimix
>
>BTW, even with an active nym, the logs are the same,
>
>"P Connection with external POP3 server failed "

You should at least set the MailP Host to 0.0.0.0 to avoid curious DNS
requests.

>
>but when a message is passed on from Hamster it
>is retrieved correctly in OM and goes to TB.
>So I guess the setup was right all along.
>Thanks.

Welcome to the Club!

Btw, how about a proof, a nym posting? ;-)

On Mon 5 Jun 2023 3:07 pm, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
> In article <20230605.064537.2c4f8df4@mixmin.net> Yamn Remailer wrote:
>> On Sun 4 Jun 2023 10:58 pm, Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
>> Yes, I had a confirm message, not sure if my OM problems
>> are solved. Its complexity means there will probably be
>> more puzzles to solve later.
>
> In my early stages I often used OM's simulation mode to check processing
> of messages to be sent, particularly glancing over the Log and Raw Data
> list.
>
>>
>> The question was also a comparison to QSL where the recipient has to
>> manually decrypt the incoming messages in QSAAM.
>
> That's the big advantage of OM. After the initial system setup and nym
> creation no additional work has to be done and you can stay within your
> mail client.
>
>>
>>> By setting your username in TB to "omnimix;pl=N" you avoid that
>>> failing normal POP3 connection attempt, which may reveal your OM
>>> activities."
>>
>> That didn't seem to change anything in the log, so I changed back to,
>> User Name: omnimix
>>
>> BTW, even with an active nym, the logs are the same,
>>
>> "P Connection with external POP3 server failed"
>
> You should at least set the MailP Host to 0.0.0.0 to avoid curious DNS
> requests.
>
>>
>> but when a message is passed on from Hamster it
>> is retrieved correctly in OM and goes to TB.
>> So I guess the setup was right all along.
>> Thanks.
>
> Welcome to the Club!
>
> Btw, how about a proof, a nym posting? ;-)
>
What, to apas? But... then my nym would be revealed, correct?
Or would the message From: appear to originate from the nymserver
i.e. send@nym.mixmin.net or similar and the nym identity hidden?

I had this down in QSL but not so far in OM.

Yamn Remailer <remailer@domain.invalid> wrote:
> On Mon 5 Jun 2023 3:07 pm, Fritz Wuehler wrote:

> > Btw, how about a proof, a nym posting? ;-)
> >
> What, to apas? But... then my nym would be revealed, correct?
> Or would the message From: appear to originate from the nymserver
> i.e. send@nym.mixmin.net or similar and the nym identity hidden?

No, of course the posting comes with your nym's From address. I have
several of them for different tasks. Easy and fast to get. I'm very
grateful to both nymservers' operators.

>
> I had this down in QSL but not so far in OM.

Still not even one OM nym?

On Mon 5 Jun 2023 11:24 pm, Hobbit wrote:
> Yamn Remailer <remailer@domain.invalid> wrote:
>> On Mon 5 Jun 2023 3:07 pm, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
>
>>> Btw, how about a proof, a nym posting? ;-)
>>>
>> What, to apas? But... then my nym would be revealed, correct?
>> Or would the message From: appear to originate from the nymserver
>> i.e. send@nym.mixmin.net or similar and the nym identity hidden?
>
> No, of course the posting comes with your nym's From address. I have
> several of them for different tasks. Easy and fast to get. I'm very
> grateful to both nymservers' operators.
>
>>
>> I had this down in QSL but not so far in OM.
>
> Still not even one OM nym?
>
One OM nym actually. The one I just made.

> Btw, how about a proof, a nym posting?

I proved it yesterday when Ernst Blofeld confirmed he
received my message ;)

Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-202306.rodent.frell.theremailer.net>
wrote:
>On Mon 5 Jun 2023 11:24 pm, Hobbit wrote:
>> Yamn Remailer <remailer@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>> On Mon 5 Jun 2023 3:07 pm, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
>>
>>>> Btw, how about a proof, a nym posting? ;-)
>>>>
>>> What, to apas? But... then my nym would be revealed, correct?
>>> Or would the message From: appear to originate from the nymserver
>>> i.e. send@nym.mixmin.net or similar and the nym identity hidden?
>>
>> No, of course the posting comes with your nym's From address. I have
>> several of them for different tasks. Easy and fast to get. I'm very
>> grateful to both nymservers' operators.
>>
>>>
>>> I had this down in QSL but not so far in OM.
>>
>> Still not even one OM nym?
>>
>One OM nym actually. The one I just made.

Still exhausted from that task?

>
> > Btw, how about a proof, a nym posting?
>
>I proved it yesterday when Ernst Blofeld confirmed he
>received my message ;)

Risen from the dead (once again)?