----- Original Message ----- From: "Nick Tarleton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 1:25 AM Subject: Re: [Tech] freenet not suited for sharing large data
> On Sunday 03 August 2003 07:36 pm, Gabriel K wrote: > > Thus only one or two proxies should be used for the actual file transfer! > But if just one is used, then the requester's identity is known! Not if you have one mechanism for searching and one for requesting a file. I must refer to the PDF again, rather than explain what says there. If you use one proxy it is true that the proxy will know that a file is beeing transferred from node A to node B, but it knows nothing more... so I don't think that's a threat to anonymity.. it's no surprise that in a file sharing network, a file is transfered, so the proxy doesn't gain much information. > If two, then > only they have to collaborate! More proxies are better for anonymity. Yes that is very true. But is it worth it? Personally I don't think so. > And > like it or not, that's Freenet's core goal, not filesharing. (WARNING: > FLAMEWAR FODDER. PLEASE DO NOT GET STARTED.) Maybe that's why I bitch about it ;) It's all a matter of probability. First of all, proxies should be chosen randomly (again, PDF), so that neither requester nor sender can decide which the intermediate nodes will be. So if you have one proxy, it's rougly p/N probability that the proxy is owned by either A or B and this breaking anonymity, if one of the sides controls p number of proxies in the network. If you have two proxies the chances are much smaller.. you do the math on that one :P So I think 2 proxies is sufficient, or maybe 3.. but not more. If only one in the chain of proxies is not owned by either side, then anonymity cannot be broken. /Gabbah _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech
