Re: Passing firewalls and hiding freenet traffic

If you were tunnelling over SSL on the https port, it's doubtful anyone could break it if you used a good key. (Wouldn't completely put it past the NSA though.) A bigger worry is that the traffic pattern would look suspicious; HTTP usually alternates small client->server transactions with large server->client transactions (unless the client is uploading lots of files); Freenet has large amounts of data continuously passing each way. Very unlike HTTP.

As has been mentioned, though, the most effective thing a repressive government could do is just stop individuals' computers from accepting TCP connections except for a very few protocols where this would be commonly needed; and these protocols probably wouldn't be easy to hide Freenet under. I remember jrand0m's old proposal for a flexible steganographic protocol that could transport Freenet over HTTP, FTP, e-mail, or pretty much anything; seems interesting.

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Toseland <toad-EI5O+8PHWbJeeLb3ft/[email protected]>
Sent: Apr 22, 2005 8:31 AM
To: "panamerica334-hX/r/[email protected]" <panamerica334-hX/r/[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [freenet-chat] Passing firewalls and hiding freenet traffic

On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 09:43:02AM +0200, panamerica334-hX/r/[email protected] wrote:

> >ssl is the best foundation for hiding traffic as there are many ssl-encrypted connections around and even if They find out how to break ssl, they would see the (with content-coding: gzip to preserve space and cleartext) http packets and have to demasquerade these. 
> >difficult to find if you have no suspicion a specific ssl-channel could be carrying freenet protocol data

_______________________________________________
chat mailing list
[email protected]
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe