[freenet-support] high cpu usage
Hello, My freenet node is killing my cpu. Got a high CPU usage when node is up. (and doing everything else on computer is a pain) see graph = http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/3935/imagecn.png (freenet node was running during two days between 25-27) This is a fresh (headless) install of freenet (v 1388) on a Linux (2.6.35) box. Java : build 1.6.0_22-b04 Cpu : Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU 330 @ 1.60GHz Is anyone know how to resolve this ? Is freenet node cpu hungry ?? (tried freenet on another computer core2duo win7, was also a cpu intensive moment...) Did I miss some settings to release cpu usage ? Please help Obiwan ! ;-) My country is falling into internet filtering frenzy :-( Julien ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Wondering about darknets security
On 07/26/2011 06:15 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote The electronic attacks mentioned above are far cheaper than any scheme to try to get people who run Freenet to spy on their friends. You can only spy on your direct friends (well, it gets less accurate the more hops away the target, but this also makes opennet surveillance much cheaper). Putting 10% of the population on the payroll (as in East Germany) is always a rather expensive way to gather intelligence! The hope is that there will be a large enough global darknet that those who have a particular need for it (for instance those who publish subversive political blogs) will be able to connect to their friends (who the authorities already know about from e.g. phone records), who don't. I guess I'm either not understanding darknet, or I'm not understanding the underlying reason(s) for Freenet as a whole. I was under the impression that darknet leaves you wide open to your friends, so choose your friends carefully. Opennet still left you open to those who connect with you, but you might have some level of anonymity when communicating. I also believe I read in one of your posts here a while back that while Freenet packets are encrypted and can't be audited for content from outside the Freenet network, it's still fairly easy to spot Freenet node activity even without knowing the specifics of what's moving in and out of that node. Now in most democratic countries, the government has to jump through certain legal hoops in order to seize one's equipment, arrest a person, etc. But if Freenet is built with the goal of allowing dissidents to communicate below the radar of a totalitarian government, by your description it seems doomed to failure. If a government-controlled ISP can use traffic analysis to spot Freenet traffic, and if they don't have legal hoops to jump through, can't that government then easily place one darknet person under house arrest and keep the darknet node running? Doesn't that give them the packet contents as well as the packet originator? And how would one securely connect to someone in darknet mode unless you know the operator of that node personally? If that person turned out to be a spy, doesn't connecting to him in darknet mode leave you with no anonymity whatsoever? ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Wondering about darknets security
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Ray Jones crawlz...@gmail.com wrote: On 07/26/2011 06:15 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote The electronic attacks mentioned above are far cheaper than any scheme to try to get people who run Freenet to spy on their friends. You can only spy on your direct friends (well, it gets less accurate the more hops away the target, but this also makes opennet surveillance much cheaper). Putting 10% of the population on the payroll (as in East Germany) is always a rather expensive way to gather intelligence! The hope is that there will be a large enough global darknet that those who have a particular need for it (for instance those who publish subversive political blogs) will be able to connect to their friends (who the authorities already know about from e.g. phone records), who don't. I guess I'm either not understanding darknet, or I'm not understanding the underlying reason(s) for Freenet as a whole. I was under the impression that darknet leaves you wide open to your friends, so choose your friends carefully. Darknet leaves you basically exactly as open to your peers as Opennet does. With Darknet, you choose your peers. With Opennet, your peers choose you (or at least, they can, and will if they're attackers that you're worried about). So, on Darknet, you should choose your peers carefully enough to be somewhat confident they aren't actively out to get you, and you'll be doing better than Opennet. If you want, you can be more paranoid about peer selection than that. In which case, Opennet *definitely* isn't for you. To summarize: Lowest security, easiest to set up: run opennet. Marginal improvement: run a hybrid Opennet/Darknet node. Mostly this should be treated as a transition point to full Darknet, or a way to help out your Darknet-only friends. Better security, somewhat harder to set up: run Darknet, and connect to anyone you personally know and don't believe to be cooperating with the Bad Guys. Still better security, even harder to set up: Be more picky about your Darknet peers. Best security: Immolate your computer on a pyre of thermite, and go live in a cave somewhere. Or simply stop doing whatever it is you're worried about getting caught at. Seriously, there is no perfect security; it's just a question of what's good enough, and what your threat model is. Opennet still left you open to those who connect with you, but you might have some level of anonymity when communicating. I also believe I read in one of your posts here a while back that while Freenet packets are encrypted and can't be audited for content from outside the Freenet network, it's still fairly easy to spot Freenet node activity even without knowing the specifics of what's moving in and out of that node. Depends on your standards of fairly easy. It requires some amount of traffic analysis, which means significantly more CPU investment. This may be enough to stop snooping ISPs, but won't stop an adversary with a specific target in mind. Now in most democratic countries, the government has to jump through certain legal hoops in order to seize one's equipment, arrest a person, etc. But if Freenet is built with the goal of allowing dissidents to communicate below the radar of a totalitarian government, by your description it seems doomed to failure. I'd call it a work in progress, best suited to countering threats less severe than a dedicated state actor with police-state level powers. And against that threat model, I have no clue what the answer is. If a government-controlled ISP can use traffic analysis to spot Freenet traffic, and if they don't have legal hoops to jump through, can't that government then easily place one darknet person under house arrest and keep the darknet node running? Doesn't that give them the packet contents as well as the packet originator? Certainly. Which is far, far harder than chasing down a target on Opennet -- that doesn't even require warrants, let alone things like house arrest. Like I said, protecting against police-state level adversaries is hard. And how would one securely connect to someone in darknet mode unless you know the operator of that node personally? If that person turned out to be a spy, doesn't connecting to him in darknet mode leave you with no anonymity whatsoever? That's precisely the idea behind Darknet. You should know your peers personally. Whether from the Internet, or Real Life. You should know them from somewhere *other* than a board dedicated to finding Darknet peers. Someone you know from conversations on Freenet might work. Choosing people at random will do bad things to the network; choosing people you have a social connection to (regardless of where that connection comes from) should provide the required network properties. Really, it depends on trust levels. If you just want better security than Opennet, all you have to do is make your adversary put some human effort into setting up each
Re: [freenet-support] Wondering about darknets security
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 11:51 -0400, Evan Daniel wrote: On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Ray Jones crawlz...@gmail.com wrote: On 07/26/2011 06:15 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote The electronic attacks mentioned above are far cheaper than any scheme to try to get people who run Freenet to spy on their friends. You can only spy on your direct friends (well, it gets less accurate the Lets suggest you are a group of young Libyan men, who want to fight Gadaffi without G knowing. You meet such groups in certain Libyan cities and discuss, then you start a darknet, only with people you have met personally and exchanged nodes at these meetings only let's say by exchaning one cd each node. Then you do planning of what to do to get rid of Gadaffi using this darknet... Then nobody but the implied persons of the darknet will know. Of course if a spy from Gadaffi becomes part of the darknet from joining such meetings, this person could compromise everything. But as long as the darknet is running properly with trusted persons only you have a very safe heaven. If compromised you could close down that darknet and start a new darknet with proper people. And so on . You could even make a new darknet twice a year to ascertain it is not compromised. It could be a group of gangsters or porno people etc - only the phantasy sets the limit. This was an attempt to explain the principle with simple terms of how a darknet could be used *smile* ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
[freenet-support] Some warning after start
Hi, I'm running on iMac-intel and did an upgrade from OSX 10.6.8 Snow Leopard to OS X 10.7 Lion. On restarting I got a message saying that the wrapper was not used… Well, I surely wouldn't mind using it… Here is some of the monologues from Terminal : it is of course clearly indicated what is missing, but it doesn't say where to find it ! I finally got one but in tar.gz, and I've no idea if Freenet can handle this format. I'll try it anyway and will see if it works (and let you know anyway) Thanks Unable to locate any of the following binaries: /Volumes/Apps perso/P2P furtif/Freenet/./bin/wrapper-macosx-x86-64 /Volumes/Apps perso/P2P furtif/Freenet/./bin/wrapper-macosx-universal-64 /Volumes/Apps perso/P2P furtif/Freenet/./bin/wrapper Starting Freenet 0.7... Let's start the node without the wrapper, you'll have to daemonize it yourself. WrapperManager: Initializing... WrapperManager: WARNING - The wrapper.native_library system property was not WrapperManager: set. Using the default value, 'wrapper'. WrapperManager: WrapperManager: WARNING - Unable to load the Wrapper's native library because none of the WrapperManager: following files: WrapperManager: libwrapper-macosx-universal-64.jnilib WrapperManager: libwrapper.jnilib WrapperManager: could be located on the following java.library.path: WrapperManager: /Volumes/Apps perso/P2P furtif/Freenet/. WrapperManager: /Library/Java/Extensions WrapperManager: /System/Library/Java/Extensions WrapperManager: /usr/lib/java WrapperManager: Please see the documentation for the wrapper.java.library.path WrapperManager: configuration property. WrapperManager: System signals will not be handled correctly. WrapperManager: freenet.jar built with freenet-ext.jar Build #29 rv29 running with ext build 29 rv29 Using default config filename freenet.ini Creating config from freenet.ini Creating logger... Set interval to 10 and multiplier to 1 Starting executor... Finding old log files. New log file is /Volumes/Apps perso/P2P furtif/Freenet/logs/freenet-1388-2011-07-29-00.log.gz Created log files Initializing Node using Freenet Build #1388 rbuild01388 and freenet-ext Build #29 rv29 with Apple Inc. JVM version 1.6.0_26 running on x86_64 Mac OS X 10.7 Starting FProxy on 127.0.0.1,0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1: NOTICE: Resource name [net/i2p/util/libjbigi-osx-x86_64.jnilib] was not found NOTICE: Resource name [net/i2p/util/libjbigi-osx-x86_64.jnilib] was not found INFO: Native BigInteger library jbigi not loaded - using pure java Trying to read master keys file... Read old master keys file ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Wondering about darknets security
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:51:12 -0400, Evan Daniel wrote: [...] To summarize: Lowest security, easiest to set up: run opennet. Marginal improvement: run a hybrid Opennet/Darknet node. Mostly this should be treated as a transition point to full Darknet, or a way to help out your Darknet-only friends. Better security, somewhat harder to set up: run Darknet, and connect to anyone you personally know and don't believe to be cooperating with the Bad Guys. Still better security, even harder to set up: Be more picky about your Darknet peers. Best security: Immolate your computer on a pyre of thermite, and go live in a cave somewhere. [...] I couldn't find the immolate-option during the installation wizard. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
