On Fri, 2015-10-16 at 19:37 +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > Am Freitag, 16. Oktober 2015, 12:09:09 schrieb Florent Daigniere: > > I don't know how to make any > > form of opennet securely work for them. Do you? > > For all of my knowledge, Opennet always was only about getting > users. Making it easy to have a somewhat usable Freenet from the > start. Because no matter how cool the tool, if no one uses it, > publishing over it is useless, because what you publish reaches no > one. > > If a chinese dissident wants to reach foreign people, Freenet has to > be usable for both. > >
I don't see how that's different from what I wrote. I guess we have different definitions for "usable". opennet -> open topology -> trivial to censor opennet -> some form of centralisation -> trivial to DoS Look at what happened to "alternative" technologies like Tor; they're like opennet, in a constant arms-race: topology is in the concensus -> blocked introduction of bridges -> enumeration of bridges introduction of bridge-buckets -> improvement of the enumeration techniques transport plugins -> ... Do we have the resources to fight it? Is it a good use of our (limited) resources/time? If you think about the problem hard enough, you'll realise that they've been lucky so far; the "other side" hasn't done any of the (trivial) attacks that'd really hurt. It's okay for them (they're about pseudo-anonymity) and not okay for us (assuming that censorship resistance is what we do). Florent
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
