On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 12:56:01AM -0500, Scott Gregory Miller wrote:
<>
> Its hardly a 100% trust system.. If that were true we wouldnt have any
> secure keytypes. You can't have a zero-trust system, but you also have to
> realize that relying on humans for security is also a bad idea. If
> history proves anything its that most humans make lousy security people.
> Just ask the millions of people whose credit card numbers float the web.
Freenet is a complicated system with a lot of aspects. Depending on what
one is refering to, the amount of trust needed varies. If you are looking
at the anonymity of the node operator, then it is 100% trust - you need to
trust every node (which if why we have never claimed this as a feature).
If you are looking at the anonymity of information publishing and
retreiving (if we leave out out of band attacks like traffic analysis for
now) then it is, as Ian said, somewhere inbetween since you need some
level of confidence that the network is working as expected. If you are
looking at the integrity of data requested, then for all the secure
keytypes it is indeed a 0% trust situation.
> This is one of the shadows over proposals like clustering that rely on
> humans to create the security. In many cases, the security they create it
> only in their heads.
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freenet-dev mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
--
'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?'
'Here,' Montag touched his head.
'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded.
Oskar Sandberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Freenet-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
