On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, Henry Hemming wrote: > I pray(in the metaphoric sense) that I'm not the first to post this. But > wouldn't it be extreamly easy for the goverment to subvert freenet by > creating a super duper cool client for freenet that they distribute for free > and as a bonus the client reports information to the goverment. This way of > exposing freenet wouldn't even cost much (compared to other metheds > mentioned), prob 1mil US would do it easy. Most home users wouldnt give a > damn who wrote the client or if its bugged (unless the press makes enough > noise about it, as with carnivore) as long as its fast and looks good. > > --typo >
Hi , Not to blow you out of the water but. Your xmailer said outlook. As in windows. Then what are you afraid of. 80 % or so (might be off a little) is windows market. And if you've kept track you'd know that the NSA had it's own backdoor in windows. Further more for a client to reach as many as possible, you need to make it opperable for the OS that is most wide-spread. So that would mean windows at the moment. The only way to make sure that a client isn't backdoored is to first of have one that takes over all th os's calls and is it's own platform. I think this would be way too much. A simpel system of signing of the source by the author's who are trusted and have met par example Ian face to face etc. get a a certain secure level. But as is with all on the internet. Use your own sense and paranoia to pick and choose what you use. So if you are paranoid enough write you own client. this was a flash of what I was thinking when I read your mail. So there'smuch more where that cam from. Greets jigal the moment. Thus -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20000813/8b726a7a/attachment.pgp>
