On Thu, 2015-11-05 at 21:19 +0000, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On 04/11/15 22:57, Bob Ham wrote:
> > That's all helpful, thanks. However, I'm still not entirely sure which > > are the "fundamental" problems Toad spoke of > Okay, I will give some here, since people are being a bit more civil. > > In brief: I'm glad you answered, thanks. Could you possibly help clarify some of the issues? (I'm disregarding opennet, social issues, implementation issues, applications, etc.; my focus is on the fundamental technical and theoretical possibility of the Freenet protocol, or a Freenet-like protocol.) > -- Tunnels are possible What kind of tunnels do you mean? Why is their possibility a problem? > -- General Sybil problem: *Every* resource is cheaper for an attacker > than a lowest common denominator new user. Unless we can e.g. charge for > entry to opennet. Is Sybil relevant outside of opennet? > - Darknet security: Pitch Black (believed to be solvable). Can you expand on the belief that this problem is solvable? > - Load management: Performance. Major mechanism design (incentives) > problems: The Patch is actively used in practice. Will look into this > this year. I don't really understand any of this :-) Is this load management within Fred (i.e. an implementation issue), or is this some part of the protocol? > - Darknet doesn't scale. How so? Are you talking about an implementation issue, an issue with the protocol, or a social issue? > - Mobile code is fundamentally unsafe on Freenet (although tunnels may > help here) What do you mean by "mobile code" exactly? _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
