Re: [freehaven-dev] re: chapters done -- moving forward options

[dmolnar <dmolnar@hcs.harvard.edu>]

On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Michael T. Shinn wrote:

> I'm a remailer operator (http://mixmaster.shinn.net) so my interests
> naturally include free haven.  Interestingly enough, my colleagues and I
> started tossing around a similiar idea to free haven back in September of
> 1999. 

Pleased to have you!


> > b) Implementing the current Free Haven design. I recall a number of
> > people were interested in this earlier, but they very conveniently
> > disappeared after voicing their interest.
> 
> Is this described in the papers on the free haven website?

Yes. The best paper to read is 
http://www.freehaven.net/doc/berk/freehaven-berk.ps

A corrected version with some of the comments from the workshop will be
available soon. In particular, there's an error in there which Wei Dai
caught - signature public keys do not produce signatures. 

More detail is available in Roger's thesis, also on the web site. But the
major ideas are in the workshop paper.

> This might seem unimportant to the process of design, (and someone else
> might have already said it) but I would suggest integrating strong
> anonymity into Freenet simply because of the media attention it has
> recieved.  Perhaps I'm assuming too much, but I would suspect the intent is
> to get as many people as possible to use free haven.

The intent is to get as many people as possible to use something which 
will provide "strong" anonymity. Part of the project is trying to figure
out what that means. Whether the final product is Free Haven, Gnuthanasia,
or Freenet++ doesn't matter so much. 

-David