[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [freehaven-dev] RfC: Anonymity and Usability chapter
please consider www.jetiants.tk
it is not a layer, the proxy mix is built inside the p2p app and it is
working with p2p, wich all other mixing layers do not with p2p.
If you regard a lot of users, as in the article, then you need a test run of
tor and emule or shareaza or morpheus, describe, how it works or not, and
what has to be done to get it work with p2p to get more users.
Mute and JEtiants . I sent you the links of their mailinglists at sf and
yahoogroups, had abig discussion about end to end encryption. TOR is mixing,
but every node and IPS can read. So it may be anonymous, but it is not
Emule board users say always, that they do not forward material which they
have not initiated. JEtiants is different, you cannot see the media, it has
end to end.
So this is a considerable standard, YOu jsut need a justification as well,
why TOR allows readable unencrypted media forwarding, users may not want to
forward, if they would know what it is.
Tor has a big legitimation debate, jetiants not or only in general.
Tor is not a blind donkey. jetiants is. What does this mean for 3.
generation p2p ?
So tor is liek mute and mute is after the jetiants p2p discussion dead.
TOR needs really a test with any p2p. if you speak of users, you only get
them with p2p !
> [Please respond to me personally, not the lists. I'll aggregate comments
> and do up another draft.]
> We've just finished a draft of a chapter for an upcoming O'Reilly book
> on Usable Security. We argue (among other things) that usability has a
> major impact on the security of an anonymizing network, since the size
> of the user base dictates the maximum anonymity set.
> Please let me know your thoughts. I think this is a pretty wide-open
> field with lots of questions that need more exploring.
Geschenkt: 3 Monate GMX ProMail + 3 Top-Spielfilme auf DVD
++ Jetzt kostenlos testen http://www.gmx.net/de/go/mail ++