Author: toad Date: 2009-01-21 01:22:03 +0000 (Wed, 21 Jan 2009) New Revision: 25172
Modified: trunk/website/pages/en/faq.php Log: Direct comparison, advice on usage Modified: trunk/website/pages/en/faq.php =================================================================== --- trunk/website/pages/en/faq.php 2009-01-21 01:03:34 UTC (rev 25171) +++ trunk/website/pages/en/faq.php 2009-01-21 01:22:03 UTC (rev 25172) @@ -473,7 +473,13 @@ and so on. And Tor has a concept of a "client", which is somebody who uses the service without providing any value to it; on Freenet, every node relays data for its neighbours. Hence the attacks on Freenet are completely different to the attacks -on Tor. Both compromise to some degree to enable more or less real-time performance. +on Tor. Both compromise to some degree to enable more or less real-time performance.</p> +<p>If you can use the darknet, trust your friends, don't reinsert files or insert easily +predictable data, and change your anonymous identity after some volume of inserts, you +should be relatively safe using Freenet. If you can connect, build up some trust in your +anonymous persona, insert your controversial content, and then disappear, again, you are +better off with Freenet, especially if the content is a website. In some other cases, +Tor is better.</p> <p>In Freenet 0.9, we will add a form of cryptographic tunnels, somewhat similar to Tor's onion routing; this should greatly reduce the impact of many of the below attacks.</p> _______________________________________________ cvs mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cvs
