On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thursday 14 August 2008 20:01, Ian Clarke wrote: > What do you think of my changes? > > "We strongly recommend that you only use Freenet in darknet mode [are we using > the term "darknet" consistently? we can't force darknet here, since that > would basically prevent them from using Freenet unless they know other > freenetters]." > > I disagree: If they set most-paranoid then opennet should not be available > until they change the threat level to somewhat-paranoid.
What is the point in that? If they are intent on using Freenet, then forcing them to select an inappropriate option doesn't make them any more secure! The question isn't so much whether opennet is secure, the question is whether it is more secure than the next best option - which in many cases will probably be a HTTP proxy, which are trivial to monitor. > The UI should make > it easy to upgrade or downgrade the threat level, enable opennet etc, but > should make it clear what the ramifications are. Yes, but forcing them to pretend that they have a lower threat level than they do is pointless. The purpose of this mechanism must be to inform the user, not make some futile attempt to restrict their behavior. Ian. -- Ian Clarke CEO, Uprizer Labs Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: +1 512 422 3588 _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
