Re: Proposal of a new hidden wiki

["vikingserver@xxxxxxxxx" <vikingserver@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Karsten, Ringo and Eduardo,

Feel free to experiment, it's fun... But:
In my opinion it's MUCH easier to:
-have one well known hidden wiki
-have one or more well known backups of the hidden wiki, with the edit
function disabled

If the primary server is down, people can just go to a backup.
If the primary server goes permanently down, a backup can become the new
primary server.

If you want to create unbreakable hidden websites, tor isn't today the
right network, but might become in the future. It might be better to use
a network with a distributed cache system like freenet or such. Or to
help develop Tor by creating a distributed cache system for Tor. But
experimenting is fun, so I don't want you not to try. You might discover
a bug or security vulnerability by doing something that isn't supposed
to be done.

Every network has it's differences. Freenet is ultra slow, is known for
hosting child porn, doesn't allow exits to the internet, and isn't
actively developed. Tor has the world's most hated and feared army as a
sponsor/initiator of the project, but on the other hand it's fast and
does it job. Freenet has a slow but working system for creating almost
unbreakable web sites, Tor has a simpler, faster but more vulnerable
system to hide websites.

With Tor it's very easy to detect if a tor server and a tor service go
down at the same time. Showing on what server a hidden service runs.


And by the way, why is there a need to have a hidden wiki, when it's
going to get detected soon enough who runs it? Why not a public wiki
with .onion links? Why not add .onion links to the public wiki that
already exists?
Blessed are thee who stay hidden inside Tor, for the hiddenness from the
evil internet bestoeth them! ;-)