On Tue, May 29, 2001 at 08:15:53PM +1200, David McNab wrote:
> Can you be more specific - what OS are you running etc?
> Also, can you reproduce this with a simple key?

Windows 2000, it was actually a friend of mine, I will ask her to send a
more detailed bug report.

> >Why not just let people connect straight to
> >FProxy as nature intended
> 
> Because with FreeWeb running as a true http proxy, it takes control of all
> the browser's access to the internet.
> This allows for a far more accurate anonymity filter. Try it and see.

It does create the problem that if people start passing around
www.xxx.free URLs then these can only be used with Freeweb.  Freeweb
should probably just interpret http://localhost:8081/ requests through
the proxy, it isn't as pretty, but at least it doesn't drive people away
from an existing cross-platform standard.

> Also, I've received reports that the FreeWeb proxy is out-performing FProxy
> in speed and reliability of key retrieval.

How is that possible if it is just going through FProxy?

> What's the problem with presenting newer users with a familiar paradigm?
> Isn't that what the EOF project is doing as well?

Perhaps, but the problem is that it is a paradigm which locks people
into FreeWeb, and which forces people to change their Proxy settings
which should not really be nescessary and definitely should not be
forced upon people.

> You can now use FreeWeb without having to deal with *any* of the *superflous
> features*. If you don't like these features, you don't have to use, or even
> know, of them. But from the feedback I've had, lots of people like these
> features.

Perhaps, but what happens when we start to see http://xxx.free/ URLs in
webpages which can only be used with FreeWeb (where there is no good
reason that these freesites could not be used on any platform that
supports Freenet)?  This will simply restrict the audiences for FreeWeb
sites, and simultaneously lower the amount of generally available
content on Freenet - all for a cosmetic improvement.  Also, don't forget
the dangers of relying on KSKs, how would a future Rob Malda feel if
someone mounted a KSK attack and gained control of www.slashdot.free?
The best way to prevent this is to encourage people to hand around CHKs
and SSKs.

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/20010529/14654256/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to