Re: Freenet 0,5 or 0,7
Matthew Toseland <toad-EI5O+8PHWbJeeLb3ft/[email protected]> Wed, 30 Aug 2006 01:17:16 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.freenet.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 06:43:07PM +0200, - wrote: > > You stated that you believe computer based attacks on Freenet are much > easier than social engineering, and therefore support the fact that freenet > should be an invite only network. > > But, I don't think this model's going to work, for several reasons: > > First, the guiding principle behind freenet right now is anonymity in the > numbers of a large number of users doing all sorts of different things. They > may easily know you're using freenet, but it's extremely difficult to prove > WHAT you downloaded. In other word it's very difficult to get specific > evidence against a specific freenet user. It's not *that* difficult. There are correlation attacks, and there is the whole caching issue - either your peers can tell what you've requested for sure (don't cache locally), or your peers *and* anyone who seizes your store can tell (cache locally). > > True, if freenet becomes illegal, the opennet may not work, but what's the > worse that's going to happen? They put up a national firewall making freenet > unusable, or freenet users will just get a message from their ISP saying > they better stop or they'll be kicked off. This may not happen until 3-5 > years from now, even though it may be illegal on paper in France already. And if we aren't ready to switch to a pure darknet, what then? > > The darknet concept does not provide this sort of anonymity, you are exposed > to the people you "trust", Not significantly more than your exposure to people you _don't_ trust on opennet. It's pretty much the same thing, except on darknet you choose who to trust; on opennet you have no choice. > I haven't heard a single response to the > question: what happens if someone in your darknet gets busted or a spy > manages to infiltrate by joining? They instantly have reasonable grounds to > assume that you are engaged in the same activity, since you're part of the > same ring. This should be enough to bust you as well. Or they could just check who you've been emailing/SMSing/calling lately. Which is why they have data retention, wiretapping etc powers. > They also now have the ability to specifically monitor WHAT you downloaded. How so? > Plus your "trusted" friend could easily rat on you. And that's that. Sure, treachery is a big problem. Opennet is a bigger problem; treachery is more expensive than harvesting, it's more expensive even than harvesting+ubernodes+sybil etc attacks on an opennet. > > How can you underestimate the importance of this? > > In contrast in opennet if a user gets busted, yes they may get a seedfile of > hundreds of different users in many different countries all engaged in > different activities. That's nice, they know all these people are using > freenet, but it will not give them specific evidence against anyone, unless > they do some extremely complex traffic analysis, spanning multiple countries > and ISPs. The authorities don't need to bust anybody. All they need to do is download the node, harvest, and they can quickly get a picture of all nodes worldwide - including those within their jurisdiction. > > And your comment about social engineering being more difficult, that doesn't > really apply to today's situation, since right now all it takes is going on > IRC to join. When is freenet planning to go underground then? #freenet-refs is for bootstrapping and testing. It's a sort of pseudo-opennet. True darknet underground connections happen through other means. > > I guess the entire 0,7 testing group will have to break into groups of > darknets of 2-3-4 people that trust each other in real life. Why must darknets be so small? I see no reason at all to expect them to be that small. I see every reason to expect true darknets to grow and amalgamate. > If it goes > underground with a few hundred hard core enthusiasts, where's the fresh > content going to come from? Relies on the bogus assumption above. > > And half will be left outside without a darknet. I personally will have to > form a one person darknet then. > > Van -- Matthew J Toseland - toad-EI5O+8PHWbJeeLb3ft/[email protected] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. _______________________________________________ chat mailing list [email protected] Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 189 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE9NkMOHFIJVywduQRAqGDAJ4k+sNzGqlnHA5sVYKpJP1Fl6q5QwCfQXS6 MgUHWEv3oo5LpBWeJZz73ZA= =/0CG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----