> My concern to this is that we are adding extra latency rather then using > the system to cut down on it. I'm worried about the time it takes per hop > as it is - I would almost consider sacrificing forward security if it > means we can save the seconds the keyexchange takes.
I share that concern. We must acknowledge that even as it stands it is unlikely that there would be a sustained attack against Freenet, if we get *too* paranoid about security we could risk creating a white elephant that is perfectly secure, but so slow that everyone goes for a less secure, but faster, alternative. If this happens then we will have failed. We must remain pragmatic in terms of balancing security with efficiency. Ian. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20000817/9f4f9adc/attachment.pgp>
