Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn wrote:
[removing Cc: tahoe-dev as this subthread is not about Tahoe-LAFS.
Of course, the subscribers to tahoe-dev would probably be interested
in this subthread, but that just goes to show that they ought to
subscribe to cryptogra...@metzdowd.com.]
On
[removing Cc: tahoe-dev as this subthread is not about Tahoe-LAFS.
Of course, the subscribers to tahoe-dev would probably be interested
in this subthread, but that just goes to show that they ought to
subscribe to cryptogra...@metzdowd.com.]
On Monday,2009-08-10, at 11:56 , Jason Resch
Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn wrote:
[cross-posted to tahoe-...@allmydata.org and cryptogra...@metzdowd.com]
Folks:
It doesn't look like I'm going to get time to write a long post about
this bundle of issues, comparing Cleversafe with Tahoe-LAFS (both use
erasure coding and encryption, and the
james hughes wrote:
On Aug 6, 2009, at 1:52 AM, Ben Laurie wrote:
Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn wrote:
I don't think there is any basis to the claims that Cleversafe makes
that their erasure-coding (Information Dispersal)-based system is
fundamentally safer, e.g. these claims from [3]: a
This conversation has bifurcated, since I replied and removed tahoe-
dev from the Cc: line, sending just to the cryptography list, and
David-Sarah Hopwood has replied and removed cryptography, leaving
just the tahoe-dev list.
Here is the root of the thread on the cryptography mailing list
On Monday,2009-08-10, at 13:47 , Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn wrote:
This conversation has bifurcated,
Oh, and while I don't mind if people want to talk about this on the
tahoe-dev list, it doesn't have that much to do with tahoe-lafs
anymore, now that we're done comparing Tahoe-LAFS to
