[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: I2P (was Re: Psiphon (Was: Bootstraping Tor manually to get past the Great Firewall))

jrandom@xxxxxxx wrote:
>> The I2P design subscribes to same design approach as Freenet:
>> "add complexity until it's secure."
> *cough*
> Or perhaps "until the performance characteristics are sufficient, all
> security aspects are both in flux and irrelevent", and as long as that
> is the case, in my view rigorous documentation and security review is
> futile, given the size of I2P's development team.
> Of course, during revamps and redesigns (such as trying to work around
> the packet counting problems Tor has [1]), I've written up small
> descriptive docs for the relevent bits [2][3][4][5].  Most of the design
> discussion occurs on IRC, summarized in the weekly status notes, and
> reviewed or expanded upon during our weekly development meetings [6].
> (if you had followed the development of I2P in the last year, you'd see
> that we've been doing anything but adding complexity - instead, we've been
> stripping out and simplifying components for the transport and netdb
> [directory].  lately though, most of the work has been aimed at one of the
> subprojects).
> I2P and Tor share some goals, and over the last 3-4 years the I2P network
> has come closer to Tor and the Tor network has come closer to I2P.  Still,
> I'm not recommending people use I2P as a replacement for Tor, or even
> necessary use I2P at all, but we are using what we feel are sound engineering
> techniques to move I2P forward, even if you may happen to disagree with one
> or more of the choices we have made.
From what I've seen of the design docs, the transport layer of I2P is
Tor's transport layer with ElGammal used instead of RSA and uses out of
band signal for tunnel building. Also, Tor is oriented more towards
Internet proxy then to hidden services. But these aren't that big
architecturally. The one big distinction is between unidirectional and
bidirectional connections.
> Of course, if you are interested in more details, I'm always glad to 
> discuss them [7]
> =jr
> [1] http://dev.i2p.net/pipermail/i2p/2005-October/001057.html
> [2] http://dev.i2p.net/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/i2p/router/doc/techintro.html?rev=HEAD
> [3] http://dev.i2p.net/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/i2p/router/doc/tunnel-alt.html?rev=HEAD
> [4] http://dev.i2p.net/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/i2p/router/doc/tunnel-alt-creation.html?rev=HEAD
> [5] http://dev.i2p.net/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/i2p/router/doc/udp.html?rev=HEAD
> [6] http://www.i2p.net/meetings
> [7] irc://irc.freenode.net/#i2p | http://forum.i2p.net/ | jrandom@xxxxxxx

They who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary
Safety, deserve neither Liberty or Safety
--Benjamin Franklin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature