On Tue, 09 May 2006 00:12:47 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 12:24:25AM +0300, Jusa Saari wrote: >> On Mon, 08 May 2006 21:26:54 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: >> >> > I think Freemail is quite an important app. I think it would be very >> > useful from a political standpoint (it tops Guerra's wishlist), from a >> > self hosting development standpoint (the rest is easy once we have >> > email), and for various other reasons. >> > >> > Should it be in the top 4 SoC apps? If not, can you give me a specific >> > reason why not? I admit that its implementation in the current system >> > will be a bit ugly, but I'm not sure this is a serious problem *as >> > long as routing works*. 0.8 might introduce server messaging and so >> > on, but IMHO we should use the storage layer as much as possible; this >> > is why I want to use passive requests to implement pub/sub. Anything >> > that relies on a server being up right at the instant of the message >> > being sent is susceptible to intersection attacks; we should play to >> > our strengths, namely non-real-time communication. (I insert ... you >> > request). >> >> Why won't you simply use Frost ? Just make a channel to serve as your >> inbox, and request that people encrypt their mail with your public key >> (which Frost already supports). Channelname collisions won't be a >> problem either, since Frost uses SSK keys for them. Besides, nearly >> every Freenet user is likely to have Frost, since it is one of the few >> programs that actually do anything usefull there (no, browsing Freeweb >> is not usefull at current speeds and bitrot rate, or at least wasn't the >> last time I tried it). > > When did you try it last? :)
Well... It has been a while. Maybe I'll give it a try again, when and if 0.7 non-darknet version becomes available. > Frost is primarily about boards, and it can't be easily gatewayed to > regular email because it doesn't have the same features. Something that Actually, it does. Assuming email-over-Freenet is going to use the insert/request model (and not some kind of direct messaging), then it's going to require message senders inserting messages with guessable keys and message receivers polling for them. Basically, any email-over-Freenet application is going to be, in essence, a message board. > could be would be useful; we could gateway the lists, for instance, and > save people the considerable trouble of setting up 2-way mixmaster > accounts. It's also been specifically asked for by rguerra, who has > considerable experience and contacts amongst people working in dark > places. >> >> Or, if you want to use an email program for communication, add POP >> protocol to Frost. It is open source, after all. > > Frost doesn't do the same thing as email. Yes, it does. It lets me send a message to another human being over Freenet. That is what email does. Simply setup a board to act as your inbox, tell it to people along with your public (Frost) key, and you're done. You aren't going to get a direct 1-to-1 mapping with regular Internet e-mail with Freenet, since there's no way to send messages directly from one host to another. Currently, the only way to deliver a message from one user to another is to insert the message under a guessable key (which, for people to insert anything to it, must be known); Frost does this. Frost also lets you crypt the messages so that only the intended recipient will be able to read them. Any and all possible Freemail implementations *must* do both things to be usefull, so not using Frost would be a waste of resources.
