You may have noticed a lack of emails from any of the freenet mailing
lists, the problem is that our T1 is down (possibly due to a minor
earthquake at 6pm yesterday). We have been working to fix it, but it
looks like a problem at our ISPs end (despite their protestations to the
contrary). They c
If you are reading this through the new [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing
lists then please disregard it.
IMPORTANT
Within the next 48 hours I plan to disable email delivery for the old
lists.sourceforge.net mailing lists.
You should go to http://freenetproject.org/in
Ok, the mailing lists have now moved. The new lists are called "Devl"
for development, "Tech" for technical discussion, "Chat" for chat, and
"Support" for support.
Further posts to these lists will result in a warning message.
You can sign up to each at:
http://www.uprizer.com/mailman/listinfo/
Mailman can create a news-freenet gateway. I hope to mirror all
messages to the alt.freenet group, however I do not have access to a
news server.
If you know of a news server which carries alt.freenet, and which could
accept connections from IP address 4.18.49.63 I will be able to set this
up.
Try again (perhaps best to send these emails direct to me so as not to
clog up the mailing list).
Ian.
On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 06:02:05PM -0800, Fred Salzer wrote:
> I get this when I sent a reply confirmation.
>
> Fred
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mail Delivery System [mailto:[EMAIL
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 02:22:01AM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> Wouldn't fixed interval updating be better in this case? Throw up an entry
> every hour with the last hours posts (or a "void" document if there were
> none).
Yes, but anyone needs to be able to post, not just a central archive.
I
I have set up the new mailing lists, but would prefer to test them for a
few days before asking people to move over (I have decided that this is
preferable to auto-subscribing people).
You can sign up at:
http://www.uprizer.com/mailman/listinfo/chat
http://www.uprizer.com/mailman/listinfo/devl
h
On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 06:52:17PM -0600, Mark J. Roberts wrote:
> I do! I do! I think we should all eat our own shit^H^H^H^Hdogfood and
> distribute the mailing list with Freenet! (HTML archives, too.)
>
> If I don't have a working and easily configured (read point at list URI
> and it configure
On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 04:01:17PM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> ...and then puts the data in a database and then somebody routes the
> bug reports to the developer most likely to understand/fix the problem
> and...
We tried it - twice (with the sourceforge bug-tracker, and with
Bugzilla) and neither wo
Ok, I have (just about) got mailman working on one of Uprizer's servers.
I am planning to set up the following mailing-lists:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anyone got any comments/suggestions on how the handover should take
place? I am planning
On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 08:29:56PM +, maynard wrote:
> I think it would be a good idea to add a list of desired info for bug
> reports to the README file (at the moment it just says "send a mail to
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"). Something along the lines of:
Indeed, or perhaps a form on the website
This will need to be addressed when Sebastian gets back to a computer,
but in the mean time, I think if you close that window, installation will
continue.
Ian.
On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 03:44:20AM -0500, starfoxmac wrote:
> my install (0.3.6 win32 binary) failed.
> after I choose Sun Java 2 v1.30
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 05:18:37PM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> That's what I'm voting for, now, too.
>
> BUT, I'd like to see some of the newer stuff, like MSKs and date-based
> redirects go into 0.4, and really try to wind 0.3 down to just bug
> fixing and egregious problems like the ref blocking you
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 01:22:40AM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> I don't think I'll make this change until date-based redirects are in
> the stable branch. And if someone suggests moving them there, I'm
> gonna scream! "stable" shouldn't mean "Everything except what Oskar's
> checking in."
But we should
Anyone fancy a challenge?
Check out GCJ at http://sources.redhat.com/java/
It is an extention to GCC (the all-powerful Gnu C Compiler) which allows
it to compile Java into executables. It is a fussy little git, but if we
could tweak Freenet to compile with GCJ then it would make life much
easie
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 03:03:07PM -0800, Aaron Voisine wrote:
> It definately makes more sense from a deniablity standpoint to
> use a dropthrough encryption algorithm on the KSK first.
We are smarter than we look ;-)
> As far as being a broadcast, I understand that's bad, but I
> figured with
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 03:48:04PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> describing the content) A, and given two other pairs, B and C
Re-reading this, it isn't clear. B and C are each lists of metadata
pairs.
Ian.
PGP signature
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 01:48:04PM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> Do you have an acceptable use policy or Terms of Service for that
> company that states that explicitly? Or were they just kissing your
> ass because you were the coolio peer-to-peer expert visiting for the
> day?
Believe me, they weren't
Ok, time for a general ramble:
So if I had a penny for every time I see someone say "If only Freenet
was implemented in C++, then I would love to help", I would be, er,
looking for some way to offload a lot of change.
Adam has been working on a C++ implementation for some time now, and has
recei
H, this is the same problem that I experienced with one of the
earlier versions of the 0.3.6 Windows release. I am not sure if
Sebastian is able to fix this, but if anyone else thinks that they can
address the problem and provide a fixed release I will upload it.
Cheers,
Ian.
PS. I wish al
> The DMCA provides intimidation, even in foreign countries. Disconnection
> would normally be on grounds of "you weren't allowed to run servers in our
> AUP which you were supposed to have read". ALL UK broadband ISPs, and the
> vast majority across the globe, have AUPs which say "no servers". Th
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 12:17:40AM -0500, Travis Bemann wrote:
> Latex IMHO is better. I personally like to manually write stuff like
> Latex and HTML. Maybe this is due to my experience with fundamentally
> broken HTML editors which generated really bad, unreadable HTML that
> used lots of auto
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 04:28:51PM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> Yes. But we will close the MITM hole before then. And we like to pretend
> that "traffic analysis" doesn't excist...
Traffic analysis does exist, and is easily countered, but only by
making Freenet useless. We could make nodes del
> Yeah, I agree. It would be trivial to reject inserts for KSKs but allow
> them for all other key types.
I don't see why we should reject inserts for KSKs either - since all you
really achieve here (assuming routing works as expected) is preventing
people from making use of a KSK whose data has
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 07:25:49PM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> I think you might be saying that you can only have "I Am Spartacus"
> protection if there is massive deployment. We don't have this, and I
> don't think we're going to have it before a technology like
> copyright.net's starts attacking node
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 02:58:02PM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> 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
> trus
> There is an issue: The current date-based psedo-updates do not
> travel along the path the first file did. This meens that Freenet's
> claim of 'routing gets better over time' is only good until the
> next update.
Well, not really. Freenet's routing works just as well for newly
inserted dat
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 04:17:54PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Allright, I volunteer my help on this. I'd especially like to see the
> Protocol Specification completed but I will work on the other documents
> also.
>
> Who wants to do the CVS magic? I could use write access.
I should be
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 02:55:49AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Who is authoring the document entitled "Freenet Protocol 1.0 Specification",
> under the documentation section on freenetproject.org?
I think it was a guy called Lee Daniel Crocker who not been active on
the lists for a long tim
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 04:17:47AM -0600, Mark J. Roberts wrote:
> Fuck. Does `java -showversion` give you
>
> java version "1.3.0"
> Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.3.0)
> Classic VM (build 1.3.0, J2RE 1.3.0 IBM build cx130-2623 (JIT enabled: jitc))
[ian@technic ia
> My point still stands, though: I think "stable" should be for stable
> stuff and main trunk should be for development.
>
> I also think we should add all the new features for pseudoupdating and
> filtering to the 0.4 feature list.
Ok, I think that there is some difference in what people feel i
> Oskar, you obnoxious twat!
HEY! You gotta watch that temper.
> Now, I've been thinking about this, and I guess you could see changing
> the behavior of the node when it gets a ref collision as a bug
> fix.
Indeed.
> Ian, did you test this at all? Like actually run it and make sure it
> work
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 01:20:26AM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> Wow! That doesn't seem really appropriate at all... It's a change in
> behavior, not a bug fix, and it's pretty much untested.
>
> It seems like it makes more sense to hold this kind of thing for the
> next release rather than putting it i
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 02:01:13AM -0500, Scott Gregory Miller wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 12:48:34AM -0500, Scott Gregory Miller wrote:
> > > I'm worried about what happens when a reinsert just fails to hit all the
> &g
Well, we need to start doing some research into this - so let me get the
ball rolling with some simple observations:
So I have noticed that Freenet's memory usage gets to about 97MB within
about 4 seconds of starting up in IBM JDK 1.3 running on Linux with
default parameters - this is clearly red
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 12:48:34AM -0500, Scott Gregory Miller wrote:
> I'm worried about what happens when a reinsert just fails to hit all the
> data. then you have two forms of the same SVK on Freenet.
Well, that will be the fault of the author, since they inserted both.
It doesn't strike me
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 07:24:44PM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> >>>>> "IC" == Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> IC> I don't think that there is any system that could facilitate
> IC> scalable information request/retrieval which
> Look ok. Commit the update to the stable branch only though please. I'm
> almost done cleaning up the collisions, and will commit asap.
Ok, it is now in the stable branch. I have also fixed makesnap.bash to
checkout and build the stable branch only, so right now the development
branch doesn't
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 04:14:32AM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> > I am not incredibly familiar with this part of the code since you guys
> > played with it, so here are the guts of the modification - feel free to
> > review.
>
> Um, "played with it" would imply writing that part of the code in
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 09:30:03PM -0500, Benjamin Coates wrote:
> I could do that. I imagine you want something along the lines of your
> "Creating Webites in Freenet" document, correct?
Yes, it should probably aim to replace this document.
> This would go well with documentation for any tool
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 08:58:54PM -0500, Travis Bemann wrote:
> With GC you should reuse datastructures whenever possible.
Travis, it sounds like you have knowledge in this area, do you have any
interest in trying to address the inefficiencies? I agree that it is
amazing that a node would requi
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 11:22:23AM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> I think that I don't feel comfortable extending even that *level* of
> trust to every Tom Dick and Harriet on the Innurnet. I'd prefer to
> choose who I let do that -- expecially when I know that there are
> people out there who will abuse
Looks like it is from FProxy.
Ian.
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 05:31:19PM -0500, Scott Gregory Miller wrote:
> How is he calling the client?
>
> On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Ian Clarke wrote:
>
> > Upgrading to Dev...
> >
> > - Forwarded message from Joey <[EMAI
Well, those with non-goldfish memories will recall that a number of
weeks ago there was discussion of moving the Freenet mailing lists to
another server, the freenetproject.org domain was even moved to this
server in preparation for this, but at the last minute, the lists seemed
to start working a
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 06:47:19PM +, Adam Langley wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 09:10:20PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > No - my intention is that every time you set a datasource in a message,
> > you can select a different shield node, so that even if one of those
>
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 11:00:42AM -0500, Scott Gregory Miller wrote:
>
> Actually, collisions on SVKs should still work for references. Only CHKs
> need to collide on data.
Why? Shouldn't someone be able to reinsert their SVK if the data falls
out of Freenet?
Ian.
PGP signature
vedAt,source,receivedWith);
throw new RequestAbortException(dr.pReceived(n,null));
}
---
Ian.
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 05:28:02PM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> It's trivial. Simply do nothing in the refFound() method of
> InsertRequest.java.
>
> On Fri, Dec 29,
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 03:42:44AM -0600, Brandon wrote:
>
> Brandon:
> > > However, I have some problems with it. The main problem is that you can't
> > > randomly select gateways as you suggest. Well, you can randomly select one
> > > the first time, but then all of the references to your node
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 03:47:37AM -0600, Brandon wrote:
> Not a problem if you have always-on Internet access, which not everyone
> does. I consider having to periodically update a guessable key to be not
> totally acceptable for a number of reasons. Not only do you have to have
> regular Interne
Upgrading to Dev...
- Forwarded message from Joey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: "Joey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Freenet-support] Bug Report
Reading 5547776 bytes (this might take a while)
Parsing form data, please wait.
Inserting key: seal
State "PREPARED" r
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 10:52:40PM -0500, Travis Bemann wrote:
> This kind of stuff really makes me wonder about the state of
> programming these days. It seems as if programmers have forgotten
> that computers have limited amounts of RAM and swap space and that
> processors are not infinitely fa
Anyone fancy fixing insert collisions so that they only fail if the data is
found (they currently also fail if a reference is found, meaning that even
after some data has fallen out of freenet, it cannot up updated until the
references have fallen out too). Should be pretty simple and a good
intr
I have checked-in and tested date-redirects in FProxy, courtesy of Matthey Ryden
(Oierw).
Ian.
PGP signature
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 11:50:28PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 11:43:46PM -0500, Benjamin Coates wrote:
> > I've just checked in changes to the Fred CLI client that allow it to create
> > and get date based redirects to allow for javascript-
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 11:43:46PM -0500, Benjamin Coates wrote:
> I've just checked in changes to the Fred CLI client that allow it to create
> and get date based redirects to allow for javascript-less pseudo-updating.
Another question - are these relative to GMT?
Ian.
PGP signature
> I did understand this, but the fact that the "shadow" node still eats as
> much bandwidth as it provides remains.
The price of added security for those who want it I guess. Lets hope
that not many people need to do this.
> Also, I don't think you can be quite random, since the node doing the
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 04:20:37AM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 06:59:54PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
>
> I find Mr. Bad's quoting annoying, but why do you and Brandon insist on
> not putting in any notice of who you are replying to at all? That is
>
> You have a point there. It is far easier for new people who really
> don't know everything that is going on with Freenet to implement stuff
> like mapfiles, while stuff like real updating requires the level of
> knowledge about Freenet that only you and Oskar and possible Ia
> So, I propose that we work on getting to the point where we can
> push a class-action suit on MediaEnforcer. MediaEnforcer
> is not yet totaly online, so we have a little time before the witch-hunt
> begins.
Apparently the DMCA makes people liable for frivolous use of the "take
down" provision
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 02:33:53AM -0800, Dev Random wrote:
> Okay, although I will prune mime types that are potential holes
> (e.g. Flash can go to arbitrary URLs).
Er, I am getting:
Warning: Unknown mime type text/html on
SSK@u1AntQcZ81Y4c2tJKd1M87cZvPoQAgE/pigdog+journal/2000-12-25/index.htm
> I'm not so sure its wise to make this an optionally-but-yes feature. This
> falls under the category of "Yes if you have more than a modem
> connection". So you configuration program people should be setting some
> defaults based on the reported connection type of the user. :)
Perhaps, althou
Hmmm, did a clean checkout and it works fine now.
Weird.
Ian.
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 10:01:42PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> Er, looks like someone forgot to check-in a directory:
>
> ../contrib/fproxy/HttpHandlerServlet.java:10: package
> Freenet.contrib.fproxy.filter does not ex
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 12:53:31AM -0500, Scott Gregory Miller wrote:
>
>
> On 27 Dec 2000, Mr.Bad wrote:
>
> > >>>>> "IC" == Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > IC> So the Unix and Windows files are now up,
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 07:31:07PM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> >>>>> "IC" == Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> IC> So the Unix and Windows files are now up, and I have sent an
> IC> announcement request to Freshmeat.
>
> Ian
Er, looks like someone forgot to check-in a directory:
../contrib/fproxy/HttpHandlerServlet.java:10: package
Freenet.contrib.fproxy.filter does not exist
import Freenet.contrib.fproxy.filter.*;
Ian.
PGP signature
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 11:43:46PM -0500, Benjamin Coates wrote:
> I've just checked in changes to the Fred CLI client that allow it to create
> and get date based redirects to allow for javascript-less pseudo-updating.
So does FProxy support this yet?
Ian.
PGP signature
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 11:43:46PM -0500, Benjamin Coates wrote:
> I've just checked in changes to the Fred CLI client that allow it to create
> and get date based redirects to allow for javascript-less pseudo-updating.
Excellent - fancy creating a HTML page which describes this? If you send
it
I just can't believe that we didn't get into this...
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,40484,00.html
Darn.
Ian.
PGP signature
> I think that any node should be default act as a shield node if so
> requested. There should be a message or a field in a message which
> indicates that the sending nodes wants to be shielded. This is a sensible
> place to put things since where the shielding indicator would goes is with
> the r
> I'm just saying that requesting an actually updated document takes less
> time than requesting a psuedo-updated document since to get a
> psuedo-updated document you have to iterate through version until you find
> the lastest one. Requesting an updated document is just a normal request.
Well,
> However, I have some problems with it. The main problem is that you can't
> randomly select gateways as you suggest. Well, you can randomly select one
> the first time, but then all of the references to your node are based on
> this node.
No - my intention is that every time you set a datasourc
> You don't move the target, you reduce its size. A smaller target is better
> because less nodes can get shut down. A system with *no* public nodes
> would be great if someone could come up with one. But a system with fewer
> public nodes (assuming that it doesn't break the network) is better.
I
> Real updating will be quite a bit faster. A lot faster, actually. Because
> it requires one request instead of an indefinite number which tends to get
> bigger.
Huh?
Ian.
PGP signature
> * I'm not entirely clear what the difference between "real" and "fake"
> updating is, however.
Real updating allows you to update some content whenever you like, rather
than on a regular schedule as with "fake" updating (I don't like those
terms - it implies that "fake" updating is a temporary
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 09:33:29PM -0500, Travis Bemann wrote:
> There has been lots of discussion on using stuff like mapfiles/MSKs to
> handle pseudoupdating. However, pseudoupdating is just a temporary
> measure that will be obsoleted by real updating.
I disagree, pseudoupdating has the benef
> Right. But let's say that there are 15 nodes protected by a shield
> node. That means that there are 15 addresses out there with the IP
> address of the shield node included -- and prominently featured as the
> protector. Like, "HERE IS SOMEONE PROTECTING NODES -> ".
Well - yeah, but assuming t
I would quite like to set up a better-organised way to handle Freenet
documentation.
This would consist of a CVS tree containing documentation (maybe in
Latex/Lyx/or Docbook format) which was segmented, but which could be
compiled into a variety of formats. There could also be HOWTOs and FAQs,
b
> The only shortcoming (with regards to the "media enforcer" pseudo-attack) with
> "shadow nodes" is that it the 'shield' node is still exposed, correct?
Correct, shield nodes will still be exposed - but it is assumed that the
operator of the shield node accepts this risk (perhaps the nature of
Hmmm, I haven't got an email from this list in about 24 hours, anyone
aware of anything wrong?
Ian.
PGP signature
> I think his point is that the main advantage of having multiple nodes
> residing behind a shield node, compared to just using the shield node
> itself, is that there's more disk space on the total set of nodes.
Well, I think that your view of this is slightly coloured by the
clustering proposal
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 06:09:11PM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> >>>>> "IC" == Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> IC> So I was sitting in the bath this-morning and I think I may
> IC> have the beginnings of an idea about how to address
> The "shadowing" makes sense should the most important and scarce commodity
> on the network be disk space
Shadowing is purely a tool to aid in protecting people's nodes from "Media
Enforcer"-style attacks, you are correct in saying that it will eat up
more bandwidth, but this isn't the point.
> This is certainly the most level-headed and reasonable post of the entire
> discussion and I must certainly agree that there is no reason to believe
> our claims without simulation and it is up to the proposes of a new system
> to create the simultion results necessary to support their point.
I
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 03:05:01AM +0100, Sebastian Späth wrote:
> I am just uploading Freenet_Setup0.3.6.exe to
> http://sspaeth.de/Freenet/Freenet_setup0.3.6.exe.
> I mailed the binary to Ian, but just in case, here it goes to the mailling
> listas well:
> Could somebody pick it up there and put
So the Unix and Windows files are now up, and I have sent an announcement
request to Freshmeat.
Ian.
PGP signature
There was a flurry of activity around creating the 0.3.6 windows binary -
and then nothing.
Has anyone created one? Has anyone tested it? Where is it?
We need to get our act together around this. In an ideal world I would
like to move CVS off Sourceforge to a server over which we have more
co
So I was sitting in the bath this-morning and I think I may have the
beginnings of an idea about how to address this issue which borrows
slightly from Brandon's proposal, but shouldn't break network topology -
it isn't perfect, but it may be enough.
Let's say, on the introduction of public/privat
> Speak in haste, regret in leisure. I deeply apologize for questioning
> your intentions. After cooling my heels for 36 hours, I'm very sorry
> for flaming you in such a stupid way.
Apology accepted. Fortunately I never lose my temper, or say things I
later regret, so it is really big of me to
Ok, so there has been quite a hoo-hah over this whole issue, allow me to
summarize, perhaps this can become the basis for something posted on the
website to address this issue:
Freenet does not, and has never claimed to, make it impossible for someone
to determine whether or not you are running a
> I need to talk with whoever does the builds and snapshots, so that we
> can serve both the "development" and "stable" snapshots. Hello?
Unfortunately snapshots are borked until sourceforge get their act
together and get cron working on the freenet.sourceforge.net server
again. I have emailed t
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 11:21:21PM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> > "SGM" == Scott G Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> SGM> Different kind of security. Freenet is perfectly fine from a
> SGM> "Dont let anyone find out whats going on/being transmitted"
> SGM> sort of stance. The arg
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 11:04:41PM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> No matter what is decided about MediaEnforcer-style attacks, it seems
> unfair not to have a prominent notice about this on the Freenet site.
What is irritating me is that it has never been a secret that someone can
discover that you are r
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 01:15:57PM -0600, Brandon wrote:
>
> > > A good question. Setting my node to transient and adding other people's
> > > node to my nodes.config file fails against an Enforcer attack. The purpose
> > > of my proposal is to defend against an Enforcer attack. The key element i
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 01:49:09PM -0600, Brandon wrote:
>
> > > Freenet does not inherently need path compression to scale. It depends on
> > > how you construct your network topology. With inform.php, Freenet needs
> > > path compression to scale because otherwise the topology becomes strung
>
Also, what is the difference between your proposal and setting your node
to transient and adding other people's nodes to your nodes.config file?
Ian.
PGP signature
> For me this is not a reaction. I have been firmly in favor of clusters for
> a long time. I think implementing it now would be good timing so as to
> combat the bad reactions people will have from running that article (such
> as "I can't run a node! I'll lose my Internet access!" and "Freenet is
> Good question. Because you can have a thriving network inside of a
> cluster that exists partially independently from the public network. You
> can do a good bit of file sharing without having to reach out into the
> public network at all. This limits visibility. If you just use a bunch of
> cli
> People will not run nodes if they are persecuted for running them. It has
> been discussed many times that we should eventually turn out attentions to
> making the fact that you're running a Freenet node difficult to determine,
> but it hasn't be of immediate importance until now. The network ca
> But with stuff like MediaEnforcer it may be necessary to keep anyone
> from knowing that you are running a Freenet node.
No, it is first nescessary to keep MediaEnforcer from knowing that you are
running a Freenet node, or at least make it very unlikely that they can
find out. If they do ident
>
>
> The people at Tianenmen (sp?) Square all got killed because they were
> stupid and naive. They thought that the Chinese gov't was going to be
> all nice and such. They were so fucking wrong. The only way that
[..snip..]
> need to avoid the battlefield like the plague. Remember that the
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
