On Friday 01 October 2010 11:37:36 Samu Voutilainen wrote: > In side note, getting Freenet to headlines with this kind of cause > could benefit the network significantly. It needs it to be able to > survive over this attack, though... People getting attacked wouldn?t > be happy :)
I'm not sure whether the load problems are the result of an attack, the recent changes in 1278-1280 seem to have helped significantly. However we have to assume we *will* be attacked on that level sooner or later, and I stand by my original assertion that current load management is fundamentally broken. Therefore I will proceed with it, slowly and cautiously, merging stuff that benefits the network in a broader sense first. However it's not the only attack we have to worry about. It's likely that comprehensive surveillance of opennet could be achieved *very* cheaply. Which arguably means that using opennet is a false sense of security... > > 2010/9/30, xor <xor at gmx.li>: > > Well, it does sound insane. > > Insane proposals DO appear in politics, but luckily it doesn't mean that > > they > > will get through. And I doubt it. > > No time to panic yet IMHO. > > > > For US citizens, it is time to try preventing this from getting through > > though. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20101001/1ae307fa/attachment.pgp>
