Ahh! One more point to make, regarding the legal issues: that's when my
problem becomes the government's problem. Because I've already spoken to
them, I've made it very clear that the dream will come true, regardless of
the legal shit. If they work with me, they will be glad. If they make me go
offshore, they will regret it. And I have to renounce my American
citizenship to make this happen, I will have their heads. They didn't like
the sound of it, but they understood, and fired back a few concerns of their
own (they were actually quite valid, which I didn't expect) Because there
are only a finite amount of math values available, and randomization to
avoid detection cant be tolerated, I'm not going to let them learn a lesson
that I've learned by designing the system. I see the obstacle ahead, and I
will change course to avoid it, regardless of what their vision or opinion
is. I've also make it so you cant send email, using your UNI ID. For the
record, it was their suggestion (and a damn good one, makes it a lot
easier). The patent will be very very useful in this regard, because I get
to retain some control over it, so people have to follow my dream, or they
aren't allowed to use it. I will use that fact to deal with the big brother
issues, which is the copy protection. I will say "those people are in
violation of my license, and are not allowed to use MFS. But its up to you
(government) to enforce it, because I got a business to run." I'm already
engaging the RIAA (meet with one of their attorneys this week, again).
Because of this, I'm pre-empting them. When they come at me in a year or
two, hopefully they will already know me. See, I'm going to the RIAA saying
"I've got your solution. It will obsolete Napster and Gnutella, and provide
you with valuable (anonymous) usage statistics. I've got copy protection,
but as an engineer it can be hacked, like all the others. If you don't like
the fact that MFS can be used to copy stuff, the its up to you to add the
engineering details that satisfies MY political requirements, because this
is still "my design". Its time for you guys to put your money where your
mouth is, and prove it. Lets see you record industry pukes engineer past the
fundamental premise of computer security. Hell, hire that Russian that jut
got nabbed. Show us how its done, you draconian fools. " I can't wait
for the RIAA, because I intend to shred them to pieces, in front of the
entire world. You guys may not like me now, but wait until you see what I've
got in line for the RIAA, when they try to do their thing. This will be FUN!
You'll see my true colors come out when they try to screw with me regarding
the Big Brother stuff. (yes, somebody beat me to the Big Brother trademark).
As for the below email, that you should all read, I have not evaluated
freenets engineering details, and won't / can't (ethically). So if you guys
truly have distributed security up and running, I salute you, for that
reason alone. I designed UNI ID because I could not see a way to get past
the shortcomings of PGP-like designs, which I also did not study in detail.
But remember, I'm convinced that ANYTHING usable can be hacked, regardless
of what it is.
Oh yeah, I added 1 line to my definitions section in the design: "100
equality: Anarchy." So I'm defining the MFS "perspective" to be one that
requires a hierarchy, because that's what exists in nature. Its just a
thought, but for 1 line, I think it says a lot.
-----Original Message-----
From: Josh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 8:58 AM
To: 'Timm Murray'
Subject: RE: [freenet-devl] words of wisdom
True, but I'm taking the engineering approach that true distributed security
is not achievable. I'm less interested in theory than a working design, and
PGP is not as foolproof as most people think. As for DES, of course it's
obsolete, but it's what set the standard. Once again, I'm using an example.
I can substitute another acronym and still get my point across.
-----Original Message-----
From: Timm Murray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 7:25 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [freenet-devl] words of wisdom
[crossposted to chat]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Josh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Freenet Developers Email List (E-mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 12:29 AM
Subject: [freenet-devl] words of wisdom
> I will not drop any more emails into the group, since I'm not a member,
and
> do not want to be that junk mail you all get. (funny example of the open
> philosophy's disadvantages :) ).
>
> The question is not weather congress or the executive is the correct
method,
> because the answer is both, and what's important is the situation.
> I understand your core philosophies, because you have well published them.
> Unfortunately I have not, but it will happen. I have an engineering
> perspective to add to this, because the issues are one and the same, if
you
> really think about it (security & philosophy). To quote you guys, its how
do
> you deal with the "cancer nodes". With my added centralness, it's the
> answer.
Around here, we never take centralness as the answer (except as a crutch to
be replaced later). In my experiance, a well thought out decentralized
design is always superior to a similar centralized design (although
poorly-done decentralized designs have enormous difficulty actualy working).
That's why I like Freenet.
> It's the white blood cells. But to say that my design is more or
> less secure is futile, because nothing that is secure is usable. The
> fundamental premise of computer security is like an ohms law tradeoff:
> usability, security, cost.
>
> What I am for, is what the NSA is aiming for with SE-Linux (my chosen
linux
> base code, irony?): to make something so secure, that not even they can
> break it. That way, they can use it and feel comfortable. Those that break
> it will want the credit of doing so. Since I'm going to have a budget to
> deal with, there will be rewards to entice people to enhance MFS. My hopes
> are that it will be the DES of file systems. Not the best in any category,
> but universal and good enough to get the job done. Generic and specialized
> are yin and yang.
"Not the best in any category" doesn't begin the describe the problems with
DES. I hope you know that around 1993, you could build a custom
DES-cracking computer for about $1 million (US) that could break any DES key
in a little over three hours. Following Moore's law, computers have gotten
2^4 times faster since then (and that estimate is on a conservitive scale).
The result is kludges like 3DES until something more suitable comes along
(AES).
Your choice of analogy does not bode well for the future.
>
> You guys will appreciate the UNI ID design, and may want to consider
looking
> it over. I may make MFS and UNI ID also use PGP, to have 2 fences guarding
> the property. That will be the executive and congress together. I am
> purposely not reading your engineering material, just as I'm not reading
AFS
> (but will later). I want it for the record that we are in parallel, and
not
> hopping over. But UNI ID is NOT MFS, so that argument doesn't apply. UNI
ID
> was created out of necessity. Its my definition of anonymous
identification.
> (yes, you semantics freaks, its an oxymoron, and trademark!)
>
> You may all view the UNI IDs figures because it's a public design.
> www.mercuryfs.net/design/uni_id.pdf Note that this week I'm changing all
> functions over to use the figure 96 method
> (www.mercuryfs.net/design/fig_96.pdf ), to just begin later on in that
> flowcharts process. Thus sending the UNI ID password (aka PIN number) via
> IPsec.
>
> My last note is, a suggestion: should you read and understand the UNI ID
> design, and how it's a public/private key distribution system, and that
MFS
> (specifically the S0 network) does not use it in any special way, then I'd
> like to propose that you all see if UNI ID may suit freenet.
No centralized design will ever suit Freenet.
> Because by
> design, both technically, legally, and philosophically, it's a and neutral
> separate entity. I intend to end up in Switzerland, since I can have an
> excuse to use the (rented, timeshared, low cost, blah blah) corporate jet,
> and go snowboarding. Not a partnership, but just the first user of it. In
> fact, if Ian is interested, we can get him to funding it? (ha!)
>
> Oh yeah, the patent will be at www.mercuryfs.net/patent.zip, in about 20
> minutes. It's a better read than my documentation, to be honest. I
consider
> it the best summary of MFS so far. What an example of the value of
> attorneys, the Marine corp. of the business world.
Attorneys, the barnacle of the business world.
_______________________________________________
Chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
