On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 03:53:25PM -0700, Tracy R Reed wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 11:08:18AM -0700, gnutella fan spake thusly:
> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/32567.html
> 
> I don't get it. What's to stop the Iranian govt from blocking access to
> anonymizer?
> 
> > Mostly unfettered. Like the Iranian filters, the U.S. service blocks porn 
> > sites -- "There's a limit to what taxpayers should pay for," says Berman. 
> 
> I'm not optimistic about freenet getting this sort of funding. Apparently
> there is such thing as too much freedom. :)
> 
> > Cottrell and Berman agree that it's only a matter of time before the 
> > Iranonymity service winds on the official blacklist. But Berman hints that 
> > the U.S. is ready for a prolonged electronic shell game with Tehran. "In 
> 
> Freenet would put an end to this shell game unless they want to stoop to
> protocol analysis of all tcp traffic on all ports and even then I'm not
> sure if freenet would be distinguishable from SSL traffic.

That's a nice dream. It's a considerable way from reality even with
major funding though.
> 
> -- 
> Tracy Reed      
> http://ultraviolet.org

-- 
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to