For what it's worth, I think there is some potential here.
If Freenet were tweaked to favor performance slightly over cryptography and
anonymous routing(I'm not suggesting we get rid of these things
completely), it might be worth attempting to sell as a very cheap cloud
service. There is a
On 2013/07/22 (Jul), at 12:22 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
>> IMO, the company/service going away ranks pretty low in the implementation
>> concerns.
>
> This does happen in practice. See e.g. Wikileaks. Companies can and do pull
> the plug on clients that cause press/political issues for
On 2013/07/22 (Jul), at 6:36 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> Okay so the idea is:
> 1. Marketing: the user has something they can keep and use for other things.
> 2. Uniqueness/cost guaranteed by the manufacturer: We can use an online
> service to establish that it's a genuine, unique yubikey,
On Sunday 21 Jul 2013 23:20:40 Robert Hailey wrote:
I'm not 100% sure how this might work, but having opennet require a security
device might be publicly acceptable, and might also serve as the monetary
disincentive to an opennet sybil attack.
Without looking too much into it, I
On Sunday 21 Jul 2013 23:20:40 Robert Hailey wrote:
I'm not 100% sure how this might work, but having opennet require a security
device might be publicly acceptable, and might also serve as the monetary
disincentive to an opennet sybil attack.
Without looking too much into it, I
On Monday 22 Jul 2013 11:40:32 Matthew Toseland wrote:
On Sunday 21 Jul 2013 23:20:40 Robert Hailey wrote:
I'm not 100% sure how this might work, but having opennet require a
security device might be publicly acceptable, and might also serve as the
monetary disincentive to an opennet
On Monday 22 Jul 2013 17:10:56 Robert Hailey wrote:
On 2013/07/22 (Jul), at 6:36 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
Okay so the idea is:
1. Marketing: the user has something they can keep and use for other things.
2. Uniqueness/cost guaranteed by the manufacturer: We can use an online
On Monday 22 Jul 2013 19:07:46 Michael Grube wrote:
For what it's worth, I think there is some potential here.
If Freenet were tweaked to favor performance slightly over cryptography and
anonymous routing(I'm not suggesting we get rid of these things
completely), it might be worth attempting
On Monday 22 Jul 2013 20:23:48 Matthew Toseland wrote:
On Monday 22 Jul 2013 19:07:46 Michael Grube wrote:
For what it's worth, I think there is some potential here.
If Freenet were tweaked to favor performance slightly over cryptography and
anonymous routing(I'm not suggesting we get
I'm not 100% sure how this might work, but having opennet require a security
device might be publicly acceptable, and might also serve as the monetary
disincentive to an opennet sybil attack.
Without looking too much into it, I supporting a smartcard interface from java
(across many
10 matches
Mail list logo
