>From: "Scott G. Miller" <scgmille at indiana.edu>
> > The netscape client plug-in first polls one of these freenet root
>servers
> > for a few freenet entry points. After which, the system is now self
> > sustaining. Also, if the client turns off his machine for extended
>periods
> > of time, and the cached server lists is no longer valid, then the
>plug-in
> > will just poll the root servers once again.
>Sure, but an attacker just needs to continuously poll that server to get a
>list of freenet nodes. Then they get bogus search warrants and take down
>peoples front doors.
>
What is the difference? If the spooks/MIB want to get a list of the freenet
nodes all they have to do is just set up a freenet node and monitor the
traffic! Realistically, you will not be able to hide the neighboring nodes
anyways.
As well, you can make the root servers detect continuous polls from a single
IP and start denying them.
So, fine, make the root servers registration optional. That is, each
freenet client/server has the option to register itself with the root
server.
The point of the root server is not to centralize the system, but rather to
allow people an entry point into the system. These are two very different
things. DNS is centralized as a tree structure, but freenet is more like a
random web of links. The problem we are trying to solve is how to get the
first node in place easily for the end user. I believe my proposal solves
that problem.
The arguements against centralization has always been that it is a point of
attack/failure. Freenet will work whether or not the root servers are in
place. Therefore, they will not be a point of failure.
Paul Tan.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
_______________________________________________
Freenet-dev mailing list
Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
