On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 11:11 -0400, Nick Mathewson wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 11:35:04AM +0200, bagelcat@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > i2p is not realy new.-) The Version History started in 2003. > > Personally, my position on I2P is that I have no idea how secure its > design is, since I haven't seen a protocol specification. So far as I > can tell, there isn't one. This doesn't mean that the protocol is > broken; just that I have no way of telling what the protocol actually > *is* without reading the source and assuming everything the source > does is intentional. Unfortunatly this is true for other well known software too; Freenet is the first example I can think of. Just to close this OT but interesting thread I2P appear a mess from a licensing point of view. If I'm not wrong, to solve the impossible task to put together the licensing of various code snippets used to build I2P, the main code is unlicensed, i.e. in the public domain. Someone know if this is true ? Thanks to all for the patience. Marco -- +--------------- http://www.winstonsmith.info ---------------+ | il Progetto Winston Smith: scolleghiamo il Grande Fratello | | the Winston Smith Project: unplug the Big Brother | | Marco A. Calamari marcoc@xxxxxxxxx http://www.marcoc.it | | DSS/DH: 8F3E 5BAE 906F B416 9242 1C10 8661 24A9 BFCE 822B | + PGP RSA: ED84 3839 6C4D 3FFE 389F 209E 3128 5698 ----------+
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part