Re: Web-of-trust questions
Helge Preuss <scout-KMZC6x8V1/[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.freenet.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 09:36:13PM +0200, Helge Preuss wrote: >> One, can't everybody discover you run freenet by doing a portscan on >> your computer? I assume that would be a more efficient way to >> mass-detect freenet nodes than smuggling hostile nodes into freenet - >> especially if you're a government agency with broad resources. > > No. They can't. Why not? There must be some protocol freenet clients (or peers) use to communicate, right? If you initiate that protocol for every port, you must find a running freenet client, right? >> Two, they mentioned that a major aim is to get many people to run >> freenet. That is obvious. But how would you achieve this goal if >> people are forced to *personally know* other people connected to the >> network? What do I do if I'm, say, a dissident with no special >> knowledge of computers and no hacker friends either? > > You're in trouble in any case in that situation, because opennet *will > be harvested and blocked*. Last year the chinese blocked freenet 0.5, not > by harvesting, but by its protocol signature (that shouldn't be possible > with 0.7); they will harvest and block if they have to. > >> Do I just give up >> and sit on my single freenet node? Or do I turn to a centralized >> service, thus rendering the web of trust obsolete? > > The centralized service will be blocked. True. So I just forget about it? >> Maybe (probably) I misunderstood something. But I don't see how the >> two goals - trusted connections and wide coverage - go together. And >> given that you can be detected with a portscan anyway, isn't it >> practical just to forget about the web of trust and maximize coverage >> instead? > > No, *you cannot be detected with a portscan*. And if we were *only* > interested in numbers, we'd be building Kazaa, not Freenet. Kazaa might be not such a bad idea. If everybody and their grandma were running freenet, using it would not be suspicious and it would work much better (disregarding scaling issues which might turn up with such a large user base). Seriously though, how do you plan to *ever* achieve a significant coverage (and make a significant contribution to privacy in this world) if you put off newbies? It's not that I have answers, just trying to understand. >> Regards >> >> Helge -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEbkamMfG7Vu9K+FQRApmdAJ9pyrXsMUoGAuZJFMITNvk+5n4sLACgqjgT soKLQbIt4dHDd/LKE4cL7o0= =MmD8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ 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