* Dave Baker <dbkr at freenetproject.org> [2006-11-01 21:41:12]: > On Wednesday 01 November 2006 21:24, Florent Daigni?re wrote: > > * Dave Baker <dbkr at freenetproject.org> [2006-11-01 21:21:54]: > > > > > On Wednesday 01 November 2006 21:04, toad wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 09:32:47AM +1300, Phillip Hutchings wrote: > > > > > On 11/2/06, Ian Clarke <ian at locut.us> wrote: > > > > > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > > > >Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > > > > > > >I don't want to encourage people to do this and then assume that they > > > > > >can include href="USK at ..." type hyperlinks in web pages. Any > > > > > >link to > > > > > >content on Freenet should be prefixed with http://127.0.0.1:8888/ - > > > > > >this may not be pretty but it works without any special browser > > > > > >plugins or configuration, and that is far more important. > > > > > > > > > > > >Ian. > > > > > > > > > > Is the node smart enough to change 127.0.0.1 to whatever interface > > > > > you're accessing it from? Some people access it across a LAN... > > > > > > > > Generally the node doesn't need to know. > > > > > > > > > > Surely the point is that if this URL is coming from a web page then it > won't > > > have been near the node, and so the node couldn't change it if it wanted > to. > > > > > > > Yes, but currently if you paste a key (e.g. from Frost, or an email) > > > > into the browser it feeds it into Google. This is a bad thing! > > > > > > Such is the price we pay for using an existing application that's not > designed > > > with anonymity in mind. The only thing I can suggest is a shipping a > Firefox > > > plugin that plonks a little 'lock to Freenet' button on the toolbar that > > > makes sure your browser can only access Freenet content and not send any > > > request out to the Big Bad World. It would presumably make the browser > > > inerpret anything you put into the address bar as a Freenet key too. Does > > > that suggest that our users should really be using Firefox as opposed to > any > > > other (non IE) browser? Perhaps. Are we willing to live with it? Is it > worth > > > the time to develop and maintain it? > > > > > > Dave > > > > Isn't it re-inventing the wheel ? :) > > > > You just have to configure your browser to use fproxy as an HTTP proxy. > > Ah - interesting. Doesn't make pasting keys into the address bar work > (Firefox > interprets it as username 'ksk' at site 'gpl.txt', Konqueror thinks I want to > send an email...) but it does safely jail stuff inside Freenet. Thing is > though that we're trying to prevent stuff being accidentally sent to a search > engine, ie. we're more trying to defend the people who haven't gone to the > trouble of setting Freenet as their web proxy (and then unsetting it when > they want to surf the web, then setting it again...) > > Dave
Using a special browser for surfing freenet makes sense ... with disabled JS/java/activeX/Flash and is probably a good idea anyway. NextGen$ -------------- 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/tech/attachments/20061101/e8907e72/attachment.pgp>
