On Friday 01 September 2006 23:56, Ed Tomlinson wrote: [snip] > As it is now do you _really_ trust any of your peers?
To a certain degree, yes, although I accept that's not the norm. >I think we are fooling ourselves if we think darknet as it stands now is really dark. Of course we are - #freenet-refs is just unfortunately essential right now. Hopefully one day enough people will be running Freenet that it won't be necessary. Until then, there's #freenet-refs... or opennet. > So you would really have to have a large cluster what really contributed to > freenet to harvest a large number of nodes. IIf one node has too many > connections and hense is too slow or reject to many requests again it will > not be trusted... That's fair enough, assuming that a node requesting connection data and then not connecting causes it to lose trust. However (and we've seen this recently) does a new node start with a 'neutral' reputation or a 'bad' one? If it's the former, a node just generates a new identity when it's made a bad name for itself. The latter, and it makes life difficult for new, well-intentioned nodes. I still don't see where the correlation between well-behaved nodes and non-malicious ones came from. Dave
