[freenet-chat] Just absurd
Not entirely related to Freenet, but hey... I just saw on a regional news program that local councils are employing people to walk around with digital cameras, filming dog walkers in case they foul the parks. "People say it's like Big Brother, but if a crime is about to be committed we have a right to protect our grounds" (or something like that) Only in Britain... -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Finding a key on your node
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 07:09:09PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > freenet_request -h 1 -s tcp/XX.XX.XX.XX:Y KEY tempfile Doesn't freenet put some uncertainty into the HTL value? IIRC even a HTL 1 request might end up going to some other nodes as well. -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] node
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 02:58:34PM +0200, Jose Torres Zapata wrote: > can anyone say me a node to start with? > > the page said in FAQ (http://freenet.sourceforge.net/inform.php) doesn't > seem to work... Try http://www.octayne.com/inform.php -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] How do I view this file?
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 11:22:31PM -0700, Aaron P Ingebrigtsen wrote: > How do I view this file properly? It is a Unix text file with what looks > HTML code in there. Here is the file, it is a very small example file > nothing more. The file you attached looks like a LaTeX document (usually ends in .tex), to view it (you will need latex installed): $ latex newdoc.txt (or whatever the file is called) $ xdvi newdoc.dvi > And also how do I view a file containing wierd symbols as well as what > looks like HTML code, when the file is a Unix Text file? Here is the > example text of that file: And this just looks strange :) -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Legal responsibility and filtering
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 09:12:58PM -0700, Dev Random wrote: > Well, if you split up the files, then you can have nodes that do not have > enough information to reconstruct any particular file. It's a future > feature, I would hope. I don't mean to be pedantic, but wouldn't you still then have all the blocks on your node when you request the file? Or maybe the node could ensure that it never cached all the blocks for one file - but then it would have to be able to tell the file from the block, which would defeat the point, no? I think I'd just better go back and sit in my hole for a while. -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Legal responsibility and filtering
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 05:12:43PM +0100, Patrick Kirk wrote: > Without the key index, how would freegle work? I wasn't quite serious about that bit! Basically if it's possible to retrieve data it's possible to find out what you have (think computer goes into courtroom, disconnected from internet and they bombard the node with requests). -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Legal responsibility and filtering
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 05:01:15PM -0500, Mathew Ryden wrote: > The reason for all of these nopes is that the node has no idea what kind of > content it's storing. The actual encryption is done clientside so trying to > filter it in the node is futile. With filesplitting, you can't glean any > information off of the size of the files. The only way to filter out > something on freenet would be to have a list of banned keys, but such a > system soon becomes unweildy as more and more "bad" data is added to the > list. Well - not quite. Assuming the keyindexes are reasonably comprehensive, and you have KSK redirects as well as CHKs on your node, you can now get a pretty good idea of what's stored. I ranted briefly about it on Freesite, then someone wrote the code (linked on Freesite). Unfortunately I can't credit them because I don't know who they are... I haven't managed to get JDK to compile and run it properly but I'll keep trying. The theory is sound... So, anyway - the upshot is you can get a list of all keys stored on your node that are listed in keyindexes, and you could then filter based on keywords or filenames. HOWEVER, the name is of course no guarantee of the content. Burn the keyindexes :) Really, the only way to be unable to determine what is stored is if you or your contacts have not more that one of the human-readable key or the actual stored data (in which case it's not relevant anyway). Sorry, I'm rambling. Go look at Freesite :) -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] PGP signatures
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 02:20:58PM -0700, Aaron P Ingebrigtsen wrote: > I'm signing this message with my PGP signature. I think that the > signature is determined by the content of the message as well as the > public key and passphrase. Well, not quite. I have a private and public key (you can get my public key from Freesite - it's not on the keyservers). When I sign a message I use my passphrase to decrypt my private key (stored on disk) and encrypt a hash of the message with it. This hash can only be decrypted with my public key - not contained in the signature - and you know the message is from me if a) you can decrypt the hash and b) The encrypted hash and a hash of the message you generate are the same. And BTW I use mutt which does funky MIME stuff with PGP that no one else seems to be able to read ;-) HTH, Leo -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] PGP signatures
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 11:30:46AM -0700, Aaron P Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Could people just kind of post thier PGP signatures here? It would > be nice to have a list of everyone's PGP signatures under one > subject. Or you could just put your PGP signature on all your > messages. :) Umm, what would we be signing if we posted pgp sigs here? Do you mean public keys? -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Best flavour of Linux?
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 10:39:05AM +1200, David McNab wrote: > > The Freenet package is part of Debian now > > Holy shit - what a coup! Not forgetting of course that Debian can be installed directly from Freenet, thanks to EOF. -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Hammity ham ham
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:32:42AM -0400, Timm Murray wrote: > Thoughts? Comments? Flame-fest? I found this page which explains things in (a little) more detail. http://www.twelvestar.com/Sourceworks/Tesla%20Radiant%20Energy.html This one is about Tesla's system for broadcasting free power to the masses, but I think the principles must be similar. I have a feeling that to get any distance you would need absurdly high potentials... Sounds a promising system though - I can't see how discharging energy into the ground could be objected to by even the wierdest government. -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Question: FCP Connection/Thread Limit
On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 02:17:08AM -0700, Mr. Bad wrote: > You, too, for that matter. B-) n0!!! 1 c4n7 b3 d47 l337!!!%! Foo, my mind's a blank. I'm sure I'll think of something... -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Question: FCP Connection/Thread Limit
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 03:44:07PM -0700, Mr. Bad wrote: > * ...who, by the way, is annoyingly anonymous at this point. By > "anonymous," I mean "unnamed," rather than for example "Mister > Argon," who is PSEUDONYMOUS. Snarfoo d00d, you need a good handle. His name is Rob. Check out one of the early ( >= 100 ) posts in the feedback section. -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION
From: MPAA in association with NSA and FreenetProject.org To: John Q. Freenet It has come to our attention that you and your fellow petitioners have illegaly abused your "Free Speech" privaleges granted under contract to US Govt., Inc. The distribution of your petition demonstrates a patented hashing/encryption system. You are revealing details of this system to unauthorised receivers, in contravention of DMCA law. You are liable to pay a fine of $4.2 trillion, serve 399 years incarcerated and serve as vice-president for the remainder of Bush's term. Yours, The Justice System. PS Freenet sucks. We're going to *get* you. -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Leo?
On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 05:44:46PM -0700, Mr. Bad wrote: > Fu-ri-sa-i-tu Come to think of it, where did the "tu" come from? Or does tsu become t(u) at the end of a word? Please excuse my ignorance :) Leo -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] This just showed up today...
On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 08:28:36PM +0200, nomad creaktop wrote: > If this is what I think it is... I'm making no assumptions for legal reasons ;-) > anyone successfully download it yet? > tell us. No, I just get the redirect to freenet:CHK@VEQV2u2Ko4EFEwbC0guHRt3dqnsXAwE,hzMuKQ1OQsMhqL~7KovnxA and it times out even with HTL 100. If it's what I think you think it is, chances are it's either dropped off Freenet due to being too big or the person inserted it has saturated his bandwidth or used HTL 1 to insert and we can't retrieve it. -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Thoughts about Freenet
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 12:38:19AM -0700, Aaron P Ingebrigtsen wrote: > What does Ad Domini, or whatever A.D. is, mean? Anno Domini - In The Year Of Our Lord Bah. I like to use CE and BCE - (before) christian era -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Thoughts about Freenet
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:06:42PM +0900, Sam Joseph wrote: > nodes, but it strikes me that in order to promote free speech, we could > have a Freenet system that only held text files, and didn't support > image or sound files. Now this might stop people from making videos of One word: uuencode -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] state of freesite insertion
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 04:24:49PM -0500, Rick Dietz wrote: > I'm getting ready to move some web material into freenet and I'm just > curious what the current state-of-the-art is in freesite insertion. There > are several nice freesites up right now. what are authors using to insert > their material and handle updates? > -rick Well I use GJ's PutFiles in a script run from cron. It generates the MSK automatically and supports simultaneous inserts, although it seems to get confused with intervals of other than one day and inserting for today - but that's probably just me being incapable. Zero required intervention is state-of-the-art enough for me. There is also freenetmirror from pigdog, but I haven't tried it. Snarfoo has a bit on both of these in the "Freenet Applications Reviewed" article. HTH, Leo Howell (freesite) -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
Re: Justified Paranoia! (was: Re: [freenet-chat] music industry guy claims monitoring of freenet)
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 09:16:34PM +1200, David McNab wrote: > If the employee tells anyone else that (s)he has handed over keys, it's also > 2 years in jail. Actually, it's five years, and you are tried in a secret court. And don't forget that they can order anybody with control over any part of a public telecoms system to install a secret tap. Run away! Run away! -- Leo Howell M5AKW freenet:MSK@SSK@2vz8xnhEJyJOlBVNfBEOWaohQFEQAgE/freesite// PGP signature
