Re: [freenet-support] seednode
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 20:06:37 +0100, folkert wrote: > > Is a seednode doing 25KB/s (and hardly any inserts) usefull for > > freenet? And am I right that this bandwidth is shared with the rest > > of the local freenet activity? > > Ok I discussed it with my hoster (excellent hoster by the way: > www.soleus.nu) and got a green light for 50KB/s. > > So if I set > node.opennet.acceptSeedConnections=true > and > node.inputBandwidthLimit=25600 > node.outputBandwidthLimit=25600 > and we've got us a new seed-node doing no more than 50KB/s? Freenet doesn't strictly obey the incoming bandwidth limit, given the nature of the UDP protocol. But, it will try to. ___ 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] seednode
> Is a seednode doing 25KB/s (and hardly any inserts) usefull for freenet? > And am I right that this bandwidth is shared with the rest of the local > freenet activity? Ok I discussed it with my hoster (excellent hoster by the way: www.soleus.nu) and got a green light for 50KB/s. So if I set node.opennet.acceptSeedConnections=true and node.inputBandwidthLimit=25600 node.outputBandwidthLimit=25600 and we've got us a new seed-node doing no more than 50KB/s? Folkert van Heusden -- Multi tail barnamaj mowahib li mora9abat attasjilat wa nataij awamir al 7asoub. damj, talwin, mora9abat attarchi7 wa ila akhirih. http://www.vanheusden.com/multitail/ -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ 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] attention users of both freenet networks
Dennis Nezic wrote: On Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:20:03 +0100, Jep wrote: Matthew Toseland : On Thursday 24 Feb 2011 23:27:01 Nomen Nescio wrote: you have a right to know USK@1WZPo6qZmlCpi6rZWjtz~kig1gcpcnzh5drmqpW9L8Q,ksaFFDkSJfnOXB3ppYhQ2R14z3W QCYxGqXNERCYcHD0,AQACAAE/wordsoftoad/-1/ I'm only going to say this once. First off, it was nearly 5 years ago. Second, I made it clear in the post and the extensive discussion at the time that Hereticnet and Freenet are (hypothetically) *two* *different* *networks*, using different (albeit related) software. No need to defend, Matthew. The idea of internal censorship may be a lousy one, at least it sounds like that to me. But the conclusion our anonymous crusader starts out with: 'proof of his hypocrisy' and you not to be trusted, is pretty ridicilous. Were you indeed not to be trusted, you wouldn't have done this brainstorming about a sort of censorship-from-the-inside in the open, and were you out on implementing whatever backdoor in FN in order to expose users, you'd surely not published about it at all. That's exactly what I would do, if I was a malicious uber-coder, to win your trust :D. Joke, seeing the :D but interesting still. Trust, IMO is given intuitively rather than gained by control, in this case by peer review of Toads code. To non-expert me it seems that someone smart enough to program software for a complex network, surely is able to hide a backdoor effectively. Seeing what all functions can be crammed in a very small trojan.. It comes down to: do I dare to do what I want to do with FN?, and that is not so much determined by if I trust the person Toad but if I trust myself doing that in particular using Freenet, the way I want to. Me, I thoroughly distrust everything with M$ in its label, because the company has so many times deceived its users and played foul towards competition. But that doesn't keep me from using its OS. It just dictates how I use it. Peculiar concept, trust. One could translate the word with self awareness. Do I trust my own judgment and instinct. The remailing whistle blower above might wonder how he feels about his own actions and attitude instead of wavering his finger. ___ 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] local cache
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 09:20:50 -0500, Dennis Nezic wrote: > On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 14:40:54 +0100, folkert wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Is it possible to somehow look into the local cache/datastore of a > > freenetnode to determine what files it hosts? Both metadata and > > data. > > Yes, of course. But everything is sliced up and encrypted, so you can > only know what it is if the file has been published, so that you know > what the chunks belong to. (Or even if it hasn't been publically published, if you already have the file (with the same filename), since non-random CHK files are unique to a specific 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] local cache
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 14:40:54 +0100, folkert wrote: > Hi, > > Is it possible to somehow look into the local cache/datastore of a > freenetnode to determine what files it hosts? Both metadata and data. Yes, of course. But everything is sliced up and encrypted, so you can only know what it is if the file has been published, so that you know what the chunks belong to. ___ 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] attention users of both freenet networks
On Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:20:03 +0100, Jep wrote: > Matthew Toseland : > > On Thursday 24 Feb 2011 23:27:01 Nomen Nescio wrote: > >> you have a right to know > >> > >> USK@1WZPo6qZmlCpi6rZWjtz~kig1gcpcnzh5drmqpW9L8Q,ksaFFDkSJfnOXB3ppYhQ2R14z3W > >> QCYxGqXNERCYcHD0,AQACAAE/wordsoftoad/-1/ > > > > I'm only going to say this once. > > > > First off, it was nearly 5 years ago. > > > > Second, I made it clear in the post and the extensive discussion at > > the time that Hereticnet and Freenet are (hypothetically) *two* > > *different* *networks*, using > different (albeit related) software. > > > > No need to defend, Matthew. The idea of internal censorship may be a > lousy one, at least it sounds like that to me. > But the conclusion our anonymous crusader starts out with: 'proof of > his hypocrisy' and you not to be trusted, is pretty ridicilous. Were > you indeed not to be trusted, you wouldn't have done this > brainstorming about a sort of censorship-from-the-inside in the open, > and were you out on implementing whatever backdoor in FN in order to > expose users, you'd surely not published about it at all. That's exactly what I would do, if I was a malicious uber-coder, to win your trust :D. ___ 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] local cache
Hi, Is it possible to somehow look into the local cache/datastore of a freenetnode to determine what files it hosts? Both metadata and data. Folkert van Heusden -- -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ 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] seednode
Hi, Is a seednode doing 25KB/s (and hardly any inserts) usefull for freenet? And am I right that this bandwidth is shared with the rest of the local freenet activity? Folkert van Heusden -- Feeling generous? -> http://www.vanheusden.com/wishlist.php -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ 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] attention users of both freenet networks
Matthew Toseland : On Thursday 24 Feb 2011 23:27:01 Nomen Nescio wrote: you have a right to know USK@1WZPo6qZmlCpi6rZWjtz~kig1gcpcnzh5drmqpW9L8Q,ksaFFDkSJfnOXB3ppYhQ2R14z3W QCYxGqXNERCYcHD0,AQACAAE/wordsoftoad/-1/ I'm only going to say this once. First off, it was nearly 5 years ago. Second, I made it clear in the post and the extensive discussion at the time that Hereticnet and Freenet are (hypothetically) *two* *different* *networks*, using different (albeit related) software. No need to defend, Matthew. The idea of internal censorship may be a lousy one, at least it sounds like that to me. But the conclusion our anonymous crusader starts out with: 'proof of his hypocrisy' and you not to be trusted, is pretty ridicilous. Were you indeed not to be trusted, you wouldn't have done this brainstorming about a sort of censorship-from-the-inside in the open, and were you out on implementing whatever backdoor in FN in order to expose users, you'd surely not published about it at all. For convenience of those interested, below the text on the freepage. === Herein LiE the words of Toad. Proof of his hypocrisy. Among other things, you will find proof, in his own statements, that he obviously desires to enable and encourage censorship in freenet so that he can purge it of content that he disapproves of. He is therefore not to be trusted Nor is his code to be trusted without intense peer review (this site mirrored to both networks to insure Toad sees it in the unlikely event he has the 'nads to respond.) In this first example Toad describes a theoretical means by which somebody who inserted something into freenet could be identified and then forced out of the network. Toad, you know better than this! Freedom of speech must be ABSOLUTE or it is not truly free. If somebody could be identified, they can also be given up for prosecution, whether they actually deserve it or no simply because you and your fellows disapprove of him. This makes you no better than the forces that freenet aims to avoid. You named this entry accurately indeed I am certainly grateful that you no longer code for 0.5! 0.7 users beware of Toad and his not quite so hidden agenda! 2006/08/29 Another amphibian Heretic There are a number of persecuted groups who would greatly benefit from freenet's technology, but who cannot use it for moral or political reasons. For example, persecuted churches. Even if you are an atheist I hope you accept that freedom of thought, and therefore of religion, is important: You have the right to sincerely believe in the Jesus, Buddha or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, if you want to. Others have the right to ignore you and think you are crazy. So there may be room for a darknet variant which uses a lot of freenet's code, but has different goals. Note that I am saying nothing against Freenet itself: I like Freenet, I am morally happy with it, but I think there may be room for something else as well, once Freenet has reached a reasonable level of stability. Such a network would be resistant to external censorship, but provide for internal censorship. In other words, it would be a high standards darknet: A community with its own standards for content, which it could enforce through expulsions and schisms, but which is not necessarily the same as the outside world's standard. On such a network, content inserts would be tagged with a cryptographic structure allowing the insert to be traced back one hop at a time, but only with the consent of (for example) 2/3rds of the nodes surrounding each hop. If somebody found some content they object to, they could file a complaint. This would be discussed on the chat system, and ultimately people on the network would inspect the disputed content (hence the need for a fairly 'high' standard), and decide whether to vote to trace the author, to trace the complainant, or to do nothing. If enough nodes vote to trace the author at each hop, he would be traced. He would then be identified to his direct peers, and everyone else would know his topological position. The network must then decide what to do with him. His direct peers may simply disconnect from him. Or they may choose to protect him, (either after the trace or during it), in which case they themselves may be disconnected from. Irreconcilable differences will have to be dealt with by a larger network split: What was one community is now two. This is by no means an easy way out of the conundrum that is freedom of speech. It requires significant effort on the part of the users, and it also requires a fairly high standard; "anything but child porn", for example, is likely to result in permanent brain damage (or at least a need for counselling) to active participants on the network, since disputed content will normally be close to the border between what is allowed and what is not. A persecuted church would have a much higher standar
