Too long? Too honest? IMHO we need to err on the side of honesty.

https://freenetproject.org/faq.html#tor

How is Freenet different to Tor? Can I access Google/Facebook/etc through 
Freenet?

Freenet is a self-contained network, while Tor allows accessing the web 
anonymously, as well as using "hidden services" (anonymous web servers). 
Freenet is not a proxy: You cannot connect to services like Google or Facebook 
using Freenet. However, Freenet has websites, filesharing, forums, chat, 
microblogging, email etc, all anonymous and hosted within Freenet.

Freenet is a distributed datastore, so once content is uploaded to Freenet, it 
will remain on Freenet forever, as long as it remains popular, without fear of 
censorship or denial of service attacks, and without needing to run your own 
web server and keep it online constantly.

The other big difference is that Freenet has the "darknet" or Friend to Friend 
mode, where your Freenet node (software on your computer) only connects to the 
Freenet nodes run by your friends, whom you have added manually (and maybe to 
their friends, to speed things up). This makes blocking Freenet, e.g. on a 
national firewall, extremely difficult.

However, most people currently use Freenet in "opennet" mode (that is, 
connecting automatically to whoever the network assigns, rather than connecting 
only to their friends). This is much less secure than using Freenet in 
"darknet" mode, and is relatively easy to block, as it does have some central 
servers ("seed nodes").

Freenet has many unsolved problems, and is still experimental. Our objective 
for Freenet is to build a global friend-to-friend darknet, which would be 
extremely difficult to block, and would provide very strong anonymity and 
censorship resistance. This will require further work on Freenet, on usability, 
speed and security, but above all it is a techno-social experiment: Will people 
know enough friends who are willing to use Freenet to make such an anonymous 
friend-to-friend network possible? This is why Freenet supports "opennet" mode: 
to let people try it out before they ask their friends to connect.

Tor is a little less experimental, and arguably is an easier problem; it may 
provide better anonymity today, provided that it isn't blocked, and of course, 
Tor lets you access the internet as a whole, whereas on Freenet you can only 
access Freenet content. However if you can use a large enough darknet, Freenet 
already provides an interesting level of censorship resistance, DoS resistance 
and anonymity.

Note that whether you use Tor or Freenet, remaining anonymous online may not be 
easy: You cannot simply connect to Facebook through Tor and expect total 
privacy; Facebook still knows who you are, even if your ISP doesn't! Posting 
your home town on an anonymous forum might breach your anonymity. Downloading a 
PDF or Word document, or some video formats, might bust you; hence both Freenet 
and Tor will warn you when you download a file that they can't make safe. 
Similarly, all the tools mentioned above (e.g. filesharing) have been rewritten 
specifically for Freenet; the tools that work on a centralised system don't 
work on a decentralised one.
Summary:

Tor:

    Lets you access the Internet (but e.g. Javascript may be risky).
    Lets you access anonymous web servers and other services.
    Lets you host anonymous web servers.
    Provides reasonable anonymity
    Has been blocked by several countries, with varying success. Even its 
hidden bridges can be harvested and blocked with moderate effort.
    Is somewhat centralised
    Is more mature and has more users and developers

Freenet in general:

    Only lets you access content uploaded to Freenet, including anonymous 
websites, email, filesharing, forums, microblogging, etc.
    Hosts content in a distributed way, you don't need to run a server, there 
are no servers, and you don't know what your node is storing, any given content 
is distributed across many nodes.
    Ensures that popular content will be available forever.
    Is older than Tor, but more experimental; arguably it's a harder task.

Freenet in darknet mode: (friend to friend: connects only to your friends' 
nodes)

    Is very hard to block, and this can be improved further with transport 
plugins.
    Provides good anonymity, and with a bit more work it could provide very 
strong anonymity (PISCES tunnels).
    Is fully decentralised: No central servers at all.

Freenet in opennet mode: (connect automatically even if you don't know anyone 
on Freenet)

    Is relatively easy to block.
    Provides limited anonymity
    Is somewhat centralised

Unfortunately most people use Freenet in opennet mode currently. The big 
question is can we build a global friend-to-friend darknet? Join us and find 
out!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to