On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 06:55:00PM -0400, SiliconZealot wrote: > Maybe after the jar's can be updated from a secure SSK...
This raises an important question of who controls the private-key to the SSK, given that this person would suddenly find themselves becomming exactly the kind of central point of failure that we want to avoid (making them subject to bribes, threats, etc to do nasty things to Freenet). People should always have the ability to make an informed decision as to whether they wish to upgrade to a new version of Freenet as there is always the possibility that it has been compromized by one of the above (Hilary Rosen could be standing beside me with a gun to my head as I write this ;). > While we are at it, lets not have fproxy warn us to upgrade until more than > just one or two of the nodes in our routing table have a higher build. As I said when this was first implemented, we can do this, but I didn't feel the need to do it until someone started to be a pain in the ass. Ian. -- Ian Clarke ian at freenetproject.org Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Project http://freenetproject.org/ Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc. http://www.uprizer.com/ Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ -------------- 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/20020820/8a31dd05/attachment.pgp>
