On Friday 14 December 2007 17:37, Colin Davis wrote:
> Your Freenet node is only minimally protected. Your machine is currently 
> hiding from most people, but it's doing so by connecting to strangers.

No it isn't.

> If you connect to friends you already know and trust, Freenet will be 
> better able to protect you.
> 
> Please get some connections to people you trust, and add them to your 
> Friends page as soon as possible.
> Once you have at least 10 Friends, turn on Secure mode and your node 
> will become invisible to the outside world.
> 
> ----
> 
> This does a few things- We want to acknowledge that using Freenet, even 
> in opennet, is more secure than the public internet. 

Marginally!

> Using words like  
> Insecure makes them think that they are now MORE vulnerable, which isn't 
> the right message for someone who just downloaded and installed this 
> software out of paranoia.

Opennet is insecure. A false sense of security results in people doing things 
they wouldn't do otherwise because they think they ARE secure.
> 
> We also want to encourage people to get their friends to install 
> Freenet, Social Networking style. This is the best way to increase 
> adoption of the network. Essentially, drive home the message that 'If 
> you get your friends to install freenet, you will be more safe'. It also 
> has the side-effect of being true ;)

Of course.
> 
> Additionally, I think it's best to "turn on" Secure mode, rather than 
> turning off opennet. It makes it seem like they are getting ADDITIONAL 
> security, not running dangerously unsafely now. Again, keep in mind the 
> user case.

I had it like that before, I got complaints from some people that it implies 
that secure mode is an option, and the default is insecure mode. The 
counter-argument is that practically speaking darknet is the optional mode 
since it requires the user to *do something*. Input?
> 
> "I want to publish this photograph that proves the Government of my city 
> is corrupt. How can I do it safely? "
> <downloads and fires up freenet.>
> "TRIVIAL for an attacker? That defeats the entire purpose!"
> <Uninstalls, and shreds picture. Corruption wins>

Or he might connect to some Friends.

Okay, maybe "trivial for an attacker to find your node" is a bit strong. 
Maybe "trivial for an attacker to find out that you are running Freenet" ? 
But once they've found that out, it IS fairly easy for them to connect to you 
and attack you. What is harder is to find the origin of specific content - it 
takes time, it requires that the originator keeps inserting it. But we want 
to convey this in as few words as possible, and as clearly as possible...
> 
> Versus
> 
> "I want to publish this photograph that proves the Government of my city 
> is corrupt. How can I do it safely? "
> <downloads and fires up freenet.>
> "Hrmm.. Well, this is better than nothing. I better start small, and get 
> some of my other democracy-loving friends to join too."
> "Once enough of us do, then it'll be safe enough to release my photo 
> showing the coverup."
> <Keeps using freenet, and moves to Darkenet in a few days. Corruption loses>

Seems unlikely on the basis of the current take-up of freenet. :|
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20071214/12592ac4/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to