At 03:42 AM 3/11/2005, Eugen Leitl wrote:
*** PGP Signature Status: good
*** Signer: Eugen Leitl (makes other keys obsolete) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Invalid)
*** Signed: 3/11/2005 3:42:52 AM
*** Verified: 3/11/2005 12:49:27 PM
*** BEGIN PGP VERIFIED MESSAGE ***
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 10:48:12PM -0800, Steve Schear wrote:
> >Why? BT is designed with zero privacy in mind.
>
> And this was a profound error, IMHO. One of the epiphanies from my work at
It was a deliberate decision on Bram Cohen's part. BT is a very useful medium to deliver software updates, movies und most for what there are currently broadcast media for.
I didn't say that Bram didn't do this on purpose, I just think it was a mistake in judgement.
If you want to be invisible to lawyers, you have to use something else.
or run BT-like apps within something else. For BT clients its straightforward to run most (e.g., Azureus) via a proxy that keeps no logs (e.g., Metropipe). For Trackers its more difficult. All I am saying is that Brahm should have paid a bit more attention to tracker protection.
(Or at least run BT on a large zombie cloud, so you have plausible deniability).
Like TOR/I2P.
> MN was that a secrecy-oriented proxy network development and successful > deployment needed to precede P2P file sharing if such networks were to > survive determined technical and legal challenges. End users often care
If a network has been declared illegal, and you're a part of that network, and somebody receives packets from you which are part of IP-protected binary blob, and your ISP rats on you, your ass is grass with the right kind of IP nazi legislation.
Obvously, the only way to prevent that from happening is not be part of that network, not make your ISP rat on you -- or, much better, do not let that legislation happen at all.
Its quite unlikely, at least in the U.S. that networks (e.g., those operated in a truly distributed fashion) will be declared illegal. Its even less likely that such networks will enable ISPs to capture anything significant about your activities.
> But trackers must still be widely accessible by the general population of > BT users and can you offer the content or obtain it without likely > identification?
Web pages have static addresses in DNS. Search on P2P in dynamic IP is much more ephemeral, and requires ISPs to keep track of (customer IPv4 time_period) tuples long enough so that their logs can be subpoenaed.
Using DNS to resolve the addresses of future trackers is probably a fools errand.
Steve
