-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David McNab a écrit : > Hi > > I've been thinking about ways to get human-friendly, yet secure, URIs > under freenet. > > (KSKs are nice, just a shame they're so easily subverted). > > My thoughts so far are: > > 1) Users would trust one or more 'namesites'. For instance, if I have > confidence in Alice's 'namesite', I would stick in my ~/.freenames file > an entry: > > alice freenet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/alice/0 > > 2) If I want to browse a freesite, with the human-friendly URL of > http://falun-gong.free, my client would look in ~/.freenames, see the > entry for 'alice', then try alice's uri for 'falun-gong'. > > 3) If the 'alice' namesite has an entry for 'falun-gong', then the URI: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]/alice/0/falun-gong > > should return the physical URI of the 'falun-gong' site I'm looking for, > which might be: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]/falun-gong/0 > > 4) Alice might trust other namesites, so her namesite would have > a file '[EMAIL PROTECTED]/alice/0/.forward > > which lists URIs for other namesites which Alice considers trustworthy. > So if Alice didn't have an entry for 'falun-gong', maybe one of the > namesites listed in her .forward file might. > > So, how would this get used in practice? > > One way I've thought of is to implement a basic name server for local > use only. This name server would have a very simple socket interface, > supporting commands like 'lookup' (look up a name), 'list' (list the > trusted namesites), 'add' (add a namesite), 'remove' (remove a namesite). > > Then the last step is to write an http proxy over the top of fproxy > which simply follows the above method to translate human-readable URIs > such as 'http://falun-gong.free' to > 'http://127.0.0.1:8888/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/falun-gong/0/index.html' > > As for the service side, running a namesite would be very easy. It would > just be a freesite where the mapping from (say) foo.free is implemented > as a relative path /foo, which contains just the real freenet URI > '[EMAIL PROTECTED]/foo/0'. > > An alternative, which would reduce the number of files on the freesite, > would be to list everything in one file, maybe '/.bulk'. > > But before I launch into something like this, the question to ask is > whether others might see value in having human-readable yet secure and > (relatively) trustworthy URIs. > > For me, I would see value, because I'm getting a bit tired of the > current URIs being so long that I can't see the file extension in my > browser address or status bars. > > Anyway, your thoughts? >
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEkaFU2VeXaa5y9IARAvObAKDHQg8+dLrzoHLszY1vdp3XCh7a1wCeLHyH 7nu7dBQ6wVklWMG/kYMOVIc= =hAD8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
