Matthew Toseland wrote:
> Well on the most trivial level, 0.5 doesn't work in china.
>
yo,
beyond harvesting the connected IP addresses to raid their owner's
homes, one big concern with encrypted protocols is that they can be
filtered out by application-level scanning firewalls. I think this
info/support
> Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060830/bbfa2328/attachment.html>
oject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
> Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060830/38aaaf09/attachment.pgp>
ubscribe at
> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
> Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
>
--
Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060830/152e9a30/attachment.pgp>
impossible. Our Boss says so.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060830/5edc1ce0/attachment.pgp>
Have you thought about that ignoring reset packets thing that was
shown to make it possible to bypass The Great Firewall? I mean, I
don't know too much about it, or if it'd be possible for
freenetbut it might be worth looking in to.
Also just wanna add that I fully support the desire to help
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 07:25:16 -0400, you wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 23 August 2006 15:19, Matthew Toseland wrote:
>
> > - Don't start the updater if the wrapper is broken
>
> I have problems with this one. I do not run the wrapper - I do want freenet
> to
> download new stable versions and then
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 22:39:59 +0200, you wrote:
>
> nobody at geonosis.homelinux.net wrote:
>
> > Please, Do NOT suggest switching to Linux, I've tried it and my hardware
> > will not
> > support it's demands. Again, this is a matter of money that unlike SOME
> > people, I
> > don't have a hell
-BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-
Message-type: plaintext
this tech, or an algo based on it?
Quantum cryptographic data network created
http://www.dailyindia.com/show/55384.php/Quantum-cryptographic-data-network-created
EVANSTON, Ill., Aug. 28 (UPI) -- U.S. scientists have
5 and 0, 7]
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 22:54:12 -0400, you wrote:
>
> If you pester anyone too much it can be self defeating. Perhaps
> unintentionally as they consume much time deleting your messages from their
> files. Or intentionally if they choose to block the excesses traffic.
Tell you
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 22:01:06 +0100, you wrote:
>
> Freenet 0.5 had opennet, and yet it was a failure.
>
Ok, I gotta know this. How is 0.5 considered a failure. I use it daily and
it works flawlessly, Frost messages flow as well as ever, as do downloads of
splitfiles. Yesterday I retrieved a
> "There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot,
jury,
> ammo. Use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt
I'm quite familiar with the other folks mentioned. As a genealogist, this
Ed Howdershelt interests me very much. Could you point me to more
information regarding him? One
On 30 Aug 2006 04:50:23 -, Anonymous via Panta Rhei
> Perhaps I was not sufficiently clear. Linux is not an acceptable answer.
> Machine limitations are a major part of that, but other considerations
> that I am not at liberty to discuss are also a factor.
>
> Changing OS is not an option no
No.
Quantum cryptography, key distribution, etc. all rely on the ability
of communicators to exchange objects like qbits or entangled photons.
Properly designed, this provides a guarantee (backed by the
Uncertainty Principle) that the communication can't be intercepted.
Needless to say, I can't
Have a look around on the wiki. It's quite possible to run freenet 0.7
from just the jars. You need to get freenet-cvs-snapshot.jar and
freenet-ext.jar, and a JVM, and run java -cp
freenet-cvs-snapshot.jar;freenet-ext.jar freenet.node.Node ...
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 04:50:23AM -, Anonymous
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 22:01:06 +0100, you wrote:
Freenet 0.5 had opennet, and yet it was a failure.
Ok, I gotta know this. How is 0.5 considered a failure. I use it daily and
it works flawlessly, Frost messages flow as well as ever, as do downloads of
splitfiles. Yesterday I retrieved a
Beyond that, we'd need something like public/private key crypto. You
could use quantum crypto for data links, but not for SSKs etc.
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 12:01:17AM -0400, Evan Daniel wrote:
No.
Quantum cryptography, key distribution, etc. all rely on the ability
of communicators to
It wasn't safe enough, though, I suppose.On 30 Aug 2006 03:27:04 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 22:01:06 +0100, you wrote: Freenet 0.5 had opennet, and yet it was a failure.Ok, I gotta know this.How is 0.5 considered a failure. I use it daily andit works
Well on the most trivial level, 0.5 doesn't work in china.
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 08:51:32PM +0200, Ortwin Regel wrote:
It wasn't safe enough, though, I suppose.
On 30 Aug 2006 03:27:04 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 22:01:06 +0100, you wrote:
Matthew Toseland wrote:
Well on the most trivial level, 0.5 doesn't work in china.
yo,
beyond harvesting the connected IP addresses to raid their owner's
homes, one big concern with encrypted protocols is that they can be
filtered out by application-level scanning firewalls. I think this
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 22:35, inverse wrote:
beyond harvesting the connected IP addresses to raid their owner's
homes, one big concern with encrypted protocols is that they can be
filtered out by application-level scanning firewalls. I think this is
exactly what's happening in China.
Have you thought about that ignoring reset packets thing that was
shown to make it possible to bypass The Great Firewall? I mean, I
don't know too much about it, or if it'd be possible for
freenetbut it might be worth looking in to.
Also just wanna add that I fully support the desire to help
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 23:47, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you thought about that ignoring reset packets thing that was
shown to make it possible to bypass The Great Firewall? I mean, I
don't know too much about it, or if it'd be possible for
freenetbut it might be worth looking in
David 'Bombe' Roden wrote:
Communication between 0.7 nodes doesn't have to exchange public keys,
those are already known as they are contained in the node reference.
nice!
I definitely need to install 0.7 and capture some packets for testing
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you thought about that ignoring reset packets thing that was
shown to make it possible to bypass The Great Firewall? I mean, I
don't know too much about it, or if it'd be possible for
freenetbut it might be worth looking in to.
it's possible to do it, but
Thank you. I must search for Ed. Nick
[Original Message]
From: Anonymous via Panta Rhei [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Nicholas Sturm [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 8/31/2006 3:40:52 AM
Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Re: [Tech] Freenet 0.7 build 953
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 01:42:42 -0400, you wrote:
26 matches
Mail list logo
