On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 01:58:01AM +0100, Martin Scheffler wrote: > Am Dienstag, 6. M?rz 2007 00:02 schrieb Matthew Toseland: > > On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 04:19:33PM -0500, Colin Davis wrote: > > > For the record- I still think that reducing the initial connection to > > > "IP:Port and Password", rather than having to exchange a noderef will > > > signing your friends up much easier, and make people more likely to > > > use the darknet ;) > > > > Is it so hard to transfer a file? Don't most IM clients (unlike IRC) > > manage to get through firewalls somehow? Admittedly they have no > > security... > > I have a problem with that. if big brother reads the email or IM, you > disclose more by exchanging full references.
Hence PGP. Or giving somebody a physical CD-ROM. > > The initial connection should be easy to establish (small amount of data), > by phone, snail mail or smoke clouds. the point here is that more people > feel invited to try it out. where is the threat when you dont > push "initiate connection"? Well, how? > > If the peers agree on that, the IP:port and one-time-password are > exchanged. And on inital connecten the noderefs are exchanged. So you need real-time exchange (presumably by phone) of IP:port in both directions. That sucks; is it acceptable? Is it close to one of the proposal mails I sent? > > good byte -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20070306/e10fab7a/attachment.pgp>
