[freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1097
Freenet 0.7 build 1097 is now available. Please upgrade. This is mostly bugfixes, but some of them are fairly significant. There is much improved support for running the node on GCJ thanks to xor, although much remains to be done (the web interface isn't very responsive on GCJ for example). There are bugfixes to connection setup, ARK fetching, requests, at least one deadlock, statistics collection, and more. If you find bugs, please report them via the bug tracker at https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ or via Frost (bearing in mind that several boards are under attack at the moment), the mailing lists, or IRC. Thanks. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20080103/c0bd41f5/attachment.pgp>
[freenet-support] jSite insertions fail
On Tue, 2008-01-01 at 09:36 -0600, David Sowder (Zothar) wrote: > Have you tried the latest jSite at > http://downloads.freenetproject.org/alpha/jSite/ ? I believe there was > a commit made recently that fixed a problem like the one you describe. Yes, I'm using that. A slightly better performance (failed at greater percentage, occasionally succedeeed 1 on 10) can be obtained emptying the datastore and temp directories. Can this be an hint? Ciao. Marco > > Marco A. Calamari wrote: > > I'mrunning a Opennet node on linux Sarge with JRE 6.0 > > jSite insertions work if the freesite is small 10-30 files > > but fail if it is big 100+ files. > > > > jSite opens a popup saying that some files cannot be inserted. > > This happens at different percentages of work in different > > attempt for the same freesite. > > > > The Freenet node is healty, with 384Mb of Java memory > > and 24 KBytes of upstream bandwidth. > > > > I was unable to find logfiles of jSite or any documentation. > > > > Someone can help? > > > > Many thanks and haooy 2008. Marco > > -- +--- http://www.winstonsmith.info ---+ | il Progetto Winston Smith: scolleghiamo il Grande Fratello | | the Winston Smith Project: unplug the Big Brother | | Marco A. Calamari marcoc at marcoc.it http://www.marcoc.it | | DSS/DH: 8F3E 5BAE 906F B416 9242 1C10 8661 24A9 BFCE 822B | + PGP RSA: ED84 3839 6C4D 3FFE 389F 209E 3128 5698 --+ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 307 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20080103/a2324272/attachment.pgp>
[freenet-support] Is Freenet not anonymous to use as it is? Can it even be dangerous for people to use, as they are mislead to think it is anonymous?
Some more detailed info is available here: http://wiki.freenetproject.org/FreenetZeroPointSevenSecurity On Thursday 03 January 2008 17:01, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Thursday 03 January 2008 03:01, niel wrote: > > :-) > > > > I love the Freenet Idea, and this is a positive thread I have made. > > > > I have been reading the newest documentation for freenet 0.7, and as I > > interpret it, freenet is not anomymous to use for me, and most other freenet > > newbies, as we do not have any "friends" to exchange "reference nodes" with, > > and we are not clever enough to use freenet as the few "freenet experts" > can. > > Sort of true. It's likely to be safer than the internet at large. It's more > survivable than Tor. But there are a lot of possible attacks, and if you have > (genuine!) Friends they are much harder. It may not be safer than Tor, otoh > it's a lot harder to block, and anyway what it does is different. > > > > Freenet has become fairly easy to install and use, and it has become fast. > > Thanks! > > > > But, is It dangerous to use? > > Well, we try to warn people, but there's a limit to how much you can do. > > > > People may think they are in safe territory. > > > > This is how I believe it is, and would like to hear some comments on this > MOST > > IMPORTANT ISSUE, from the "freenet experts" - and to create some serious > > debate, to really make freenet anonymous for ALL PEOPLE of the world. > > > > Until that time: Should ordinary people be told not to use freenet in an > > anonymous way until a new safe freenet version arrives? > > Freenet is still an alpha, it is nowhere near 1.0. There are major possible > attacks and there are major changes that will need to be made before 1.0 to > make it safer. At this stage, I wouldn't rely on it protecting you if you're > going to get into major trouble if found, but otoh it *is* safer than some > other tools people use, even in oppressive regimes. While it is certainly > useful, it is released primarily for testing and development; if there were > no users, there probably wouldn't be any devs either. > > > > I do not say, that freenet cannot be used anonymously, but only for a small > > exclusive group of smart people who know how to. > > > > I had hoped that freenet was a really free place to be for everyone, where > > really free expression of speech and thought could be executed. > > There is no such thing as perfect security. Freenet is still under > development, and the remaining major security issues will take some time to > deal with. However, building a large, fast and useful Freenet will > undoubtedly help in terms of anonymity: if there are only a few hundred, or > even a few thousand, nodes, they can all be marked as low probability > suspects and correlated with other evidence, ignoring any technical attacks > on your anonymity. > > > > A really anonymous Freenet is urgently needed, now more than ever, and it > > should at best be as easy to use as the ordinary Internet - > > Anonymity will always have costs. For example, you need to not make it easy to > find you by giving away too much personal info. > > > > that would be a revolution! > > We're working on it. We need users to get where we are going. It's not > perfect, but it's improving, and it's useful. 0.7, amongst other changes, > introduces the long-term "darknet" feature, which will be critical to > Freenet's long term security and survivability. > -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20080103/dbeaa616/attachment.pgp>
[freenet-support] www.minihowto.org find freenet too difficult for endusers, documentation needs to be shortened
On Wednesday 26 December 2007 11:51, niel wrote:
> :-)
> I am writing some minihowtos for linux newbies, and have also written about
> freenet.
Hi. Yes, your mini-howto was good, so we linked to it, but we had to remove it
when opennet ("insecure mode") came in because it was no longer up to date.
> I find the documentation on "http://freenetproject.org/documentation.html;
> very good, but also confusing about some important points, like "connect"
> and "darknet" (just two important examples).
Sorry, I tend to forget about that part of the website; I assume most people
ignore it.
> I have freenet running (I think), but do not get much downloaded.
Is insecure mode enabled? Do you have many open connections (on the Friends
and Strangers pages)?
>
> My point is to make a quick manual, which is made for newbies, using only
> simple everyday words and phrases.
> I am only speaking on behalf of freenet NEWBIES, who want to experience/go
to
> the freenet, and surf, and fetch stuff, and I have read, that most people
> only spend short time on websites, when surfing (human impatience). *humour*
> I would like to make such a quick manual, but I cannot find my way to get
the
> information I need.
:)
>
> I made a manual, and freenet took the link away, without explaining exact to
> my brain, what had to be changed/updated.
Sorry, we did send you an email about that. The problem is that after we
introduced insecure mode (aka opennet), it was no longer accurate. You no
longer need to get noderefs from IRC, that is the big change. You can and
should exchange noderefs with people you know, but if you enable insecure
mode, it will get onto the network without you having to exchange any refs,
so you never need to connect manually to people you don't know. The installer
opens the node config wizard, which will ask whether you want to use insecure
mode.
I'd be very happy to add the link back in if it is updated to reflect the
current situation.
> I have updated, but are unsure of what I have done.
> For me, it is important to get explanations about terms, which are not
evident
> to newbies.
By all means ask away. We have tried to simplify the documentation (the
download page, the questions the node asks etc), but more work is probably
needed.
> What I can offer is the mind of a newbie, to communicate with the minds of
the
> developers!
> I made a manual, but would like to make it even better and easier to
> understand.
>
> Another possibility is you to update your documentation, and remove
> unnecessary text (if needed?).
This is also a good idea. I have made some changes to the connect page.
>
> This is a friendly mail, hoping to get my problem sorted out?
>
> Happy New Near to all you brave people out there.
And hope you had a merry christmas!
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20080103/108f6da1/attachment.pgp>
[freenet-support] Is Freenet not anonymous to use as it is? Can it even be dangerous for people to use, as they are mislead to think it is anonymous?
On Thursday 03 January 2008 03:01, niel wrote: > :-) > > I love the Freenet Idea, and this is a positive thread I have made. > > I have been reading the newest documentation for freenet 0.7, and as I > interpret it, freenet is not anomymous to use for me, and most other freenet > newbies, as we do not have any "friends" to exchange "reference nodes" with, > and we are not clever enough to use freenet as the few "freenet experts" can. Sort of true. It's likely to be safer than the internet at large. It's more survivable than Tor. But there are a lot of possible attacks, and if you have (genuine!) Friends they are much harder. It may not be safer than Tor, otoh it's a lot harder to block, and anyway what it does is different. > > Freenet has become fairly easy to install and use, and it has become fast. Thanks! > > But, is It dangerous to use? Well, we try to warn people, but there's a limit to how much you can do. > > People may think they are in safe territory. > > This is how I believe it is, and would like to hear some comments on this MOST > IMPORTANT ISSUE, from the "freenet experts" - and to create some serious > debate, to really make freenet anonymous for ALL PEOPLE of the world. > > Until that time: Should ordinary people be told not to use freenet in an > anonymous way until a new safe freenet version arrives? Freenet is still an alpha, it is nowhere near 1.0. There are major possible attacks and there are major changes that will need to be made before 1.0 to make it safer. At this stage, I wouldn't rely on it protecting you if you're going to get into major trouble if found, but otoh it *is* safer than some other tools people use, even in oppressive regimes. While it is certainly useful, it is released primarily for testing and development; if there were no users, there probably wouldn't be any devs either. > > I do not say, that freenet cannot be used anonymously, but only for a small > exclusive group of smart people who know how to. > > I had hoped that freenet was a really free place to be for everyone, where > really free expression of speech and thought could be executed. There is no such thing as perfect security. Freenet is still under development, and the remaining major security issues will take some time to deal with. However, building a large, fast and useful Freenet will undoubtedly help in terms of anonymity: if there are only a few hundred, or even a few thousand, nodes, they can all be marked as low probability suspects and correlated with other evidence, ignoring any technical attacks on your anonymity. > > A really anonymous Freenet is urgently needed, now more than ever, and it > should at best be as easy to use as the ordinary Internet - Anonymity will always have costs. For example, you need to not make it easy to find you by giving away too much personal info. > > that would be a revolution! We're working on it. We need users to get where we are going. It's not perfect, but it's improving, and it's useful. 0.7, amongst other changes, introduces the long-term "darknet" feature, which will be critical to Freenet's long term security and survivability. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20080103/a9c21e41/attachment.pgp>
[freenet-support] Node shredders my hard disk
Is the disk the store is on full, or anywhere near full? This is a good point made below. Apart from that, are you sure it's the store that is the problem? The node uses disk for lots of other things. On Thursday 03 January 2008 00:21, Jack O'Lantern wrote: > Hi bback, > > > --- bbackde at googlemail.com wrote: > > My cache (100gb) is full. Since it reaches 100% the node very often > > works extensively on my hard disk (searches old data to overwrite?). > > Maybe it's your OS accessing fragmented files? > > > This leads to a never stopping 100% access rate to my disk, and I > > fear that the disk will die soon under this load. > > > > Is there anything that can be done to avoid this? Shrinking my store > > would be nice (shrink to 70% and let it grow again), the disk load is > > much smaller when the cache is not full. But shrinking won't work > > (takes days, bug is open). > > > > If nothing helps I have to delete my cache manually (I hope I can > > save my store, how?) > > This may not be optimal but what about deleting a random 30% of your > store? I don't know if this works, though. > > I did some tests with a freenet 0.5 datastore on an ext2 partition. > Despite ext2's fragmentation resistance, files become heavily > fragmented when the filesystem is nearly full (~95%). It's not > thrashing the disk but access times become notably longer. This may in > part be due to the broader range of key sizes in freenet 0.5. > Furthermore, ext2 does not have an adjustable fragment size. At some > time, I might repeat this test with ext4, but right now it simply > appears to be a bad idea to use the full 100% of a partition for your > datastore. > > Jack > > > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping > > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > > -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20080103/2d959aa4/attachment.pgp>
[freenet-support] Greetings from a newbie and possible helper.
Greetings FreeNeters, I've been exploring and testing various systems for anonymous Internet use and installed Freenet a week or so a go. My interest is largely for ideological reasons. With the coming of the Internet, it seems governments, corporations, illegal organizations, etc. are all finding the temptation to spy on the public and one another way too easy to indulge. I see a desperate need for some way to fight back. Although its still in its infancy, Freenet has certainly got my curiosity up. Even if Freenet in its current form doesn't survive, the technologies involved will hopefully be helpful to later projects. While I would not call myself an expert at anything, I have a long background in computers, both in hardware and software development. I may be able to contibute some time toward FeeNet. As I study the info online at freenetproject.org I'm certain I'll have questions. Is the Tech list a more appropriate place to ask them? Patrick Hooker
[freenet-support] Is Freenet not anonymous to use as it is? Can it even be dangerous for people to use, as they are mislead to think it is anonymous?
:-) I love the Freenet Idea, and this is a positive thread I have made. I have been reading the newest documentation for freenet 0.7, and as I interpret it, freenet is not anomymous to use for me, and most other freenet newbies, as we do not have any "friends" to exchange "reference nodes" with, and we are not clever enough to use freenet as the few "freenet experts" can. Freenet has become fairly easy to install and use, and it has become fast. But, is It dangerous to use? People may think they are in safe territory. This is how I believe it is, and would like to hear some comments on this MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE, from the "freenet experts" - and to create some serious debate, to really make freenet anonymous for ALL PEOPLE of the world. Until that time: Should ordinary people be told not to use freenet in an anonymous way until a new safe freenet version arrives? I do not say, that freenet cannot be used anonymously, but only for a small exclusive group of smart people who know how to. I had hoped that freenet was a really free place to be for everyone, where really free expression of speech and thought could be executed. A really anonymous Freenet is urgently needed, now more than ever, and it should at best be as easy to use as the ordinary Internet - that would be a revolution!
Re: [freenet-support] Is Freenet not anonymous to use as it is? Can it even be dangerous for people to use, as they are mislead to think it is anonymous?
On Thursday 03 January 2008 03:01, niel wrote: :-) I love the Freenet Idea, and this is a positive thread I have made. I have been reading the newest documentation for freenet 0.7, and as I interpret it, freenet is not anomymous to use for me, and most other freenet newbies, as we do not have any friends to exchange reference nodes with, and we are not clever enough to use freenet as the few freenet experts can. Sort of true. It's likely to be safer than the internet at large. It's more survivable than Tor. But there are a lot of possible attacks, and if you have (genuine!) Friends they are much harder. It may not be safer than Tor, otoh it's a lot harder to block, and anyway what it does is different. Freenet has become fairly easy to install and use, and it has become fast. Thanks! But, is It dangerous to use? Well, we try to warn people, but there's a limit to how much you can do. People may think they are in safe territory. This is how I believe it is, and would like to hear some comments on this MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE, from the freenet experts - and to create some serious debate, to really make freenet anonymous for ALL PEOPLE of the world. Until that time: Should ordinary people be told not to use freenet in an anonymous way until a new safe freenet version arrives? Freenet is still an alpha, it is nowhere near 1.0. There are major possible attacks and there are major changes that will need to be made before 1.0 to make it safer. At this stage, I wouldn't rely on it protecting you if you're going to get into major trouble if found, but otoh it *is* safer than some other tools people use, even in oppressive regimes. While it is certainly useful, it is released primarily for testing and development; if there were no users, there probably wouldn't be any devs either. I do not say, that freenet cannot be used anonymously, but only for a small exclusive group of smart people who know how to. I had hoped that freenet was a really free place to be for everyone, where really free expression of speech and thought could be executed. There is no such thing as perfect security. Freenet is still under development, and the remaining major security issues will take some time to deal with. However, building a large, fast and useful Freenet will undoubtedly help in terms of anonymity: if there are only a few hundred, or even a few thousand, nodes, they can all be marked as low probability suspects and correlated with other evidence, ignoring any technical attacks on your anonymity. A really anonymous Freenet is urgently needed, now more than ever, and it should at best be as easy to use as the ordinary Internet - Anonymity will always have costs. For example, you need to not make it easy to find you by giving away too much personal info. that would be a revolution! We're working on it. We need users to get where we are going. It's not perfect, but it's improving, and it's useful. 0.7, amongst other changes, introduces the long-term darknet feature, which will be critical to Freenet's long term security and survivability. pgpuWUdlnneJ8.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] www.minihowto.org find freenet too difficult for endusers, documentation needs to be shortened
On Wednesday 26 December 2007 11:51, niel wrote: :-) I am writing some minihowtos for linux newbies, and have also written about freenet. Hi. Yes, your mini-howto was good, so we linked to it, but we had to remove it when opennet (insecure mode) came in because it was no longer up to date. I find the documentation on http://freenetproject.org/documentation.html; very good, but also confusing about some important points, like connect and darknet (just two important examples). Sorry, I tend to forget about that part of the website; I assume most people ignore it. I have freenet running (I think), but do not get much downloaded. Is insecure mode enabled? Do you have many open connections (on the Friends and Strangers pages)? My point is to make a quick manual, which is made for newbies, using only simple everyday words and phrases. I am only speaking on behalf of freenet NEWBIES, who want to experience/go to the freenet, and surf, and fetch stuff, and I have read, that most people only spend short time on websites, when surfing (human impatience). *humour* I would like to make such a quick manual, but I cannot find my way to get the information I need. :) I made a manual, and freenet took the link away, without explaining exact to my brain, what had to be changed/updated. Sorry, we did send you an email about that. The problem is that after we introduced insecure mode (aka opennet), it was no longer accurate. You no longer need to get noderefs from IRC, that is the big change. You can and should exchange noderefs with people you know, but if you enable insecure mode, it will get onto the network without you having to exchange any refs, so you never need to connect manually to people you don't know. The installer opens the node config wizard, which will ask whether you want to use insecure mode. I'd be very happy to add the link back in if it is updated to reflect the current situation. I have updated, but are unsure of what I have done. For me, it is important to get explanations about terms, which are not evident to newbies. By all means ask away. We have tried to simplify the documentation (the download page, the questions the node asks etc), but more work is probably needed. What I can offer is the mind of a newbie, to communicate with the minds of the developers! I made a manual, but would like to make it even better and easier to understand. Another possibility is you to update your documentation, and remove unnecessary text (if needed?). This is also a good idea. I have made some changes to the connect page. This is a friendly mail, hoping to get my problem sorted out? Happy New Near to all you brave people out there. And hope you had a merry christmas! pgpxu4HlKAZdd.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1097
Freenet 0.7 build 1097 is now available. Please upgrade. This is mostly bugfixes, but some of them are fairly significant. There is much improved support for running the node on GCJ thanks to xor, although much remains to be done (the web interface isn't very responsive on GCJ for example). There are bugfixes to connection setup, ARK fetching, requests, at least one deadlock, statistics collection, and more. If you find bugs, please report them via the bug tracker at https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ or via Frost (bearing in mind that several boards are under attack at the moment), the mailing lists, or IRC. Thanks. pgpsXU2EymKR7.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1097
On Friday 04 January 2008 00.51.33 Matthew Toseland wrote: Freenet 0.7 build 1097 is now available. Please upgrade. This is mostly bugfixes, but some of them are fairly significant. There is much improved support for running the node on GCJ thanks to xor, although much remains to be done (the web interface isn't very responsive on GCJ for example). There are bugfixes to connection setup, ARK fetching, requests, at least one deadlock, statistics collection, and more. If you find bugs, please report them via the bug tracker at https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ or via Frost (bearing in mind that several boards are under attack at the moment), the mailing lists, or IRC. Thanks. :-) To update for linux users run following in a command shell: cd /home/yourusername/Freenet ./update.sh Please also see: http://freenetproject.org/index.php?page=download ___ 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
