Re: [freenet-support] idea
What about that the freenet daemon periodically (configurable/disable-ble of course) announces itself on the lan(s) to which it is connected? That way freenet-nodes can interconnect and speed up distribution of data. There is a plugin: MDNSDiscovery. This uses it to announce FCP, but you still need to open FCP to the LAN... Or plugin to avahi. Data distribution on Freenet doesn't work like that. Data segments are actually spread all across Freenet, ideally with no particular peer having a large portion of a large splitfile. I don't think having fast random LAN connections would speed things up -- the bottleneck will still be the LAN's connection to the Internet. (Not to mention the fact that it would be at least somewhat less secure. (Better chance of traffic analysis and such tricks against you.)) We did think about an is the lan trusted? option some time ago. This would both announce and open FCP and Fproxy. Unfortunately defining the lan is hard, when big untrusted NATed networks (e.g. ISPs in russia etc) often use private address space, and autodetecting it *reliably* is also hard. You could make it configurable. Default: do not trust. You should however peer with the other computers on your LAN, if you know their operators, of course. Which hopefully you do if the LAN is trusted! Troublesome if everybody's on dhcp. Folkert van Heusden -- MultiTail na wan makriki wrokosani fu tan luku den logfile nanga san den commando spiti puru. Piki puru spesrutu sani, wroko nanga difrenti kroru, tya kon makandra, nanga wan lo moro. http://www.vanheusden.com/multitail/ -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Friday 18 Feb 2011 19:40:59 Dennis Nezic wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:01:10 +0100, folkert wrote: What about that the freenet daemon periodically (configurable/disable-ble of course) announces itself on the lan(s) to which it is connected? That way freenet-nodes can interconnect and speed up distribution of data. There is a plugin: MDNSDiscovery. This uses it to announce FCP, but you still need to open FCP to the LAN... I think this is also possible with UPnP. Not sure if we use it there. Data distribution on Freenet doesn't work like that. Data segments are actually spread all across Freenet, ideally with no particular peer having a large portion of a large splitfile. I don't think having fast random LAN connections would speed things up -- the bottleneck will still be the LAN's connection to the Internet. (Not to mention the fact that it would be at least somewhat less secure. (Better chance of traffic analysis and such tricks against you.)) We did think about an is the lan trusted? option some time ago. This would both announce and open FCP and Fproxy. Unfortunately defining the lan is hard, when big untrusted NATed networks (e.g. ISPs in russia etc) often use private address space, and autodetecting it *reliably* is also hard. You should however peer with the other computers on your LAN, if you know their operators, of course. Which hopefully you do if the LAN is trusted! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Friday 18 Feb 2011 19:40:59 Dennis Nezic wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:01:10 +0100, folkert wrote: What about that the freenet daemon periodically (configurable/disable-ble of course) announces itself on the lan(s) to which it is connected? That way freenet-nodes can interconnect and speed up distribution of data. Data distribution on Freenet doesn't work like that. Data segments are actually spread all across Freenet, ideally with no particular peer having a large portion of a large splitfile. I don't think having fast random LAN connections would speed things up -- the bottleneck will still be the LAN's connection to the Internet. (Not to mention the fact that it would be at least somewhat less secure. (Better chance of traffic analysis and such tricks against you.)) If the requests are served from the other node's cache then the risk against a distant attacker is significantly reduced. The risk against that other node increases, of course - this is the tradeoff. Bottom line, more friends is better if it means you can turn off opennet, and if you do actually know them (even if you don't trust them absolutely, they're still better than opennet). signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Saturday 19 Feb 2011 19:24:30 Edzard Pasma wrote: Op 19-feb-2011, om 18:21 heeft folkert het volgende geschreven: Ok, that was not your point :-) Ok currently maybe not too many nodes in the net but maybe this changes when governments restrict access to what you can browse. Here in Europe governments already start talking about installing filters. This is why you /don't/ want any kind of broadcasting, or any other kind of leak of identifiable traffic. Just encrypted non-identifiable noise. Then we definately need a solution around the seed nodes. I mean traffic going to them is a big fat warning that someone is doing freenet :-) Folkert van Heusden The seednodes might then once be blocked by authorities in their struggle against the evil. The solution seems to have as many potential seednodes as their are users. Thus one automatically becomes one after a while. The other way around, any foreigner is then a potential seednode. Adddresses can dynamically be collected to be used at a next start. Automatically harvesting seednodes is a possibility. The problems with it are: 1. Many nodes have low uptime. This can be detected. 2. Many nodes have poor connectivity (NATed without port forwarding). This can be detected but is some additional work to be automated and reliable. 3. They could block *ALL* the seednodes. If we do what Tor did and have a server that sends you a small number of seeds out of the global collection, they can still harvest them using lots of gmail addresses, IP addresses etc. This is what the Chinese did with Tor. Note that a gmail address is just a CAPTCHA, and these can be solved in bulk cheaply. 3. Opennet is inherently harvestable: Even if we distribute the seednodes and take all other precautions, it is feasible to find all nodes in order to block them. 4. Opennet is grossly insecure. It may be possible to improve this a bit against an attacker who is not able to connect to all nodes, surround groups of nodes gradually and so on, but IMHO really good security on opennet is very unlikely. Viva darknet! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
Ok, that was not your point :-) Ok currently maybe not too many nodes in the net but maybe this changes when governments restrict access to what you can browse. Here in Europe governments already start talking about installing filters. This is why you /don't/ want any kind of broadcasting, or any other kind of leak of identifiable traffic. Just encrypted non-identifiable noise. Then we definately need a solution around the seed nodes. I mean traffic going to them is a big fat warning that someone is doing freenet :-) Folkert van Heusden -- Multi tail barnamaj mowahib li mora9abat attasjilat wa nataij awamir al 7asoub. damj, talwin, mora9abat attarchi7 wa ila akhirih. http://www.vanheusden.com/multitail/ -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:01:10 +0100, folkert wrote: What about that the freenet daemon periodically (configurable/disable-ble of course) announces itself on the lan(s) to which it is connected? That way freenet-nodes can interconnect and speed up distribution of data. Data distribution on Freenet doesn't work like that. Data segments are actually spread all across Freenet, ideally with no particular peer having a large portion of a large splitfile. I don't think having fast random LAN connections would speed things up -- the bottleneck will still be the LAN's connection to the Internet. (Not to mention the fact that it would be at least somewhat less secure. (Better chance of traffic analysis and such tricks against you.)) ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
True, but it can be used to find a way to other nodes further down the path. This way one doesn't need to connect to the central seednodes to find ways to reach the global network/the rest of the freenet network. Ah, for initial connection to Freenet that might be useful, although I don't think it'll be used too often. (I have trouble finding Freenet friends in my entire city -- let alone in my LAN :p.) You can add known Well I was thinking maybe in the future we're all using mesh networking over wifi (or whatever wireless protocol we then have). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking Currently nobody is preventing you to anonymously buy a wifi card (with a non-registered mac address - some cards even enable you to change it) so then you could hook into the mesh without anyone knowing it is you. Ok, that was not your point :-) Ok currently maybe not too many nodes in the net but maybe this changes when governments restrict access to what you can browse. Here in Europe governments already start talking about installing filters. Currently only for kiddy porn but I'm afraid that when such a filter is in place the step to block certain political views or so is much smaller. Normal people (your neighbour so to say) start to know these things like FreeNet/Tor. This week there was an item on national television in the Netherlands about how Tor helps oppressed people to get their opinions/news items/etc. out! (and trustworthy) lan members to your list of darknet-friends, and connect that way to Freenet without using any seednodes. Or you can modify your seednodes.fref file by only including references to your LAN nodes. It is also a matter of convenience. If I visit some conference I don't want to be hassled with the need of configuring all kinds of software just to get work done. For that DHCP is too centralised (centralised == bad). It's also not a good idea to be able to broadcast to anyone that you're using Freenet. (To prevent them from blacklisting you, et cetera.) (The whole point of Darknet mode was to make this impossible.) If I'm at a conference, i don't have to register my mac address. So I setup my wifi, connect to tor for regular internet traffic and freenet for what it is for. Same thing for that mesh I wrote about above. Folkert van Heusden -- -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
Normal people (your neighbour so to say) start to know these things like FreeNet/Tor. This week there was an item on national television in the Netherlands about how Tor helps oppressed people to get their opinions/news items/etc. out! Oh it was also a rather positive news item. http://nos.nl/artikel/219423-tor-digitale-solidariteit-met-middenoosten.html Folkert van Heusden -- Multitail es una herramienta flexible que permite visualizar los log file y seguir la ejecución de comandos. Permite filtrar, añadir colores, combinar archivos, la visualización de diferencias (diff- view), etc. http://www.vanheusden.com/multitail/ -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 21:35:00 +0100, folkert wrote: Well I was thinking maybe in the future we're all using mesh networking over wifi (or whatever wireless protocol we then have). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking Freenet-Darknet should work wonderfully over such a network :). (Well, assuming you're not roaming. And that the meshes aren't too isolated :p). Ok, that was not your point :-) Ok currently maybe not too many nodes in the net but maybe this changes when governments restrict access to what you can browse. Here in Europe governments already start talking about installing filters. This is why you /don't/ want any kind of broadcasting, or any other kind of leak of identifiable traffic. Just encrypted non-identifiable noise. Currently only for kiddy porn but I'm afraid that when such a filter is in place the step to block certain political views or so is much smaller. Obviously. Their (Statist's) worst enemy is the free flow of information. It is also a matter of convenience. If I visit some conference I don't want to be hassled with the need of configuring all kinds of software just to get work done. It's a tradeoff -- ease-of-use and anonymity. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea for wininstaller
I tryed windinstaller but it gave me a warning that with explorer its dangerous so I uninstall. THank You - Original Message - From: Mathew Ryden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 5:07 PM Subject: Re: [freenet-support] idea for wininstaller - Original Message - From: Vitenka - Zen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Damn - forgot my other suggestion. Why not register fcp:// or similar, so that we can give links into freeweb from external websites without having to rely upon guessing the client port the user has chosen? How would fcp help in this at all? Forgive me if that's alreasy been done somewhere. -Mathew ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Re: [freenet-support] idea for wininstaller
Zlatin Balevsky ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: since Fred still takes up to 20 or 30 seconds to load on slower machine, You have some really WEIRD notions of what constitutes a slower machine. If your node only takes 20 seconds to start up, you've got a pretty fast machine, or a very small data store. but the tray utility appears almost instantly, it would be neat not to display the red rabbit while the node is loading but the red rabbit with the grean arrow on it. Also a text tip freenet is loading, please wait... would prevent ultra-newbies to immediately try and click on it. These are good suggestions. But the problem is that the freenet.log never actually says WHEN the node is ready. It says Starting interfaces but even then the interfaces aren't actually startED. They're just startING. The node would have to say All interfaces are now started. Node is ready. or something similar in order for this to be really useful. And I'm not even sure that's possible (you'd have to ask someone who speaks Java). In my experience, I'll often get connection refused on port for several seconds after Starting interfaces appears in the log. It can be very frustrating. -- Greg Wooledge | Truth belongs to everybody. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- The Red Hot Chili Peppers http://wooledge.org/~greg/ | msg01881/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
