IMHO Freenet's long-term survival, and that of the internet as we know it, 
depends on one thing: Cover traffic. Large scale, peer to peer, largely legal 
traffic flows involving the 99% of internetizens who don't know or care about 
anonymity. I will outline my vision of what this might be below, but the bigger 
question is how much of this exists already? OneSwarm and FreedomBox spring to 
mind, but I haven't looked at them in detail.

Ideal Freenet cover traffic, or:
How to make P2P a permanent fixture.

Basic motivation:
- The internet is way too centralised. We are rapidly moving to a situation 
where everything is in "the cloud", and everything in the cloud is 1) subject 
to arbitrary deletion by corporates; 2) will disappear if the corporate in 
question goes bust or changes ownership; 3) isaccessible by governments without 
a warrant. Blocking p2p traffic is technically feasible, and is likely to 
happen in many countries if p2p is only used by a few 0.1%'s of the population, 
for mostly illegal purposes.
- For Freenet and disruptive p2p in general to survive, we need substantial 
legitimate "cover traffic". I doubt that this will come from Freenet itself. It 
doesn't really matter whether this is FNP; it matters that it's encrypted, 
robust traffic, and that it happens in significant volumes between domestic IP 
addresses, often with one node sending to several nodes simultaneously.
- We need something usable by the 99% of people who don't want the ideological 
baggage, performance impacts and cognitive overheads of Freenet.

What functionality do people want that can be provided by P2P, without 
ideological baggage?
- It needs to be free as in beer!
- It's okay to use some disk space.
- It's okay to use some bandwidth; internet is improving all the time.
- It should only store and relay what people want to store.
- It needs to be reliable.
- It needs to not require 100% uptime.
- It is NOT anonymous.
- It must be zero maintenance.
- It must be minimal system overhead. (No, encryption is not an obstacle to 
this. Encryption is fast enough on modern systems)
- It must get through local network obstacles, e.g. blocking UDP on mobile 
networks, nested NATs, that the users can't deal with manually. (Skype does 
well on this).
- It must be EASY TO USE.

Functions:
- Distributed backup, including what-happens-if-my-house-burns-down. Encrypt, 
replicate the data to your friends' computers (with some support for deduping 
in files that are not sensitive). Monitor which systems are up so we know the 
health status. House-burns-down-escape-with-nothing scenario: Either 1) the 
data is purely encrypted with a password and you can just decrypt it, OR for 
the paranoid 2) password plus involvement of N of the M friends (shared secret).
- CCTV/burglar alarm data off-site archiving. Similar problem to the above, 
some points are different. Different rules for archiving; more paranoid users 
can disable deleting content without manual intervention involving multiple 
friends. Internet Eyes style system - users can allow friends to watch their 
CCTV if they want, e.g. if on holiday, with motion detection to speed things up.
- Encrypted instant messaging, voice and email. Skype's encryption is rumoured 
to be centralised, not PKI, and Skype is vulnerable - e.g. Saudi recently 
threatened to block Skype and other systems if they don't backdoor it.
- Hamachi style easy to use tunneling, but fully decentralised.
- WASTE style filesharing. No ideological issues and anyway less of a threat.
- Firewall evasion via tunnels. E.g. Saudi again - tunneling to a VoIP service 
outside the country.
- Web hosting e.g. of photos.

Now, what existing products implement the above? Do we need to implement 
something new? What chance do they have of breaking through into the mainstream?
- OneSwarm? Used extensively for filesharing, somewhat close to the above, has 
some anonymity, darknet...
- What is the state of the art in distributed backups?

How much of the above should be combined? Arguably the first two are the sweet 
spot ...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20130330/ecf8afdb/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to