Jeremy Rand <[email protected]> writes: > Hi George, thanks for the reply. > > On 03/02/2014 06:27 AM, George Kadianakis wrote: >> I'd like to see human-readable names in HSes, but I'm not very >> familiar with Namecoin. I don't want to discourage you from working on >> this, but I'm not sure if I would be a good mentor for this. > Any idea who might be a good mentor for this idea? >
No idea. I don't know of any people experienced with Namecoin in Tor. Sorry. >> BTW, I remember watching a presentation about namecoin, and it seemed >> like there are still a few serious unresolved problems (domain >> squatting is easy, no revocation, lightweight clients are >> impossible). > Domain squatting is known to be an issue, and there are proposals to > adjust the name pricing structure of Namecoin to disincentivise > squatting. While these proposals are not implemented at the moment, I > think it's likely that they will be implemented in the future. > > There is a workaround (recently implemented) for a specific use case > of revocation: a Namecoin name can import data from a second Namecoin > name, in such a way that one name can be held in a safe location while > the other name would be easier to update (but overrideable by the > first name). So if the easy-to-update name has its keys compromised, > the safely-stored name can recover the situation. This doesn't solve > the more generic revocation problem; I will inquire with the Namecoin > developers about this. (I think it's possible to add full revocation > support to Namecoin in the future.) > > Lite clients do not exist right now, but are definitely possible to > build. The UTXO lite client being implemented for Bitcoin should be > mergeable to Namecoin in the future. >> Also, namecoin are not anonymous, but people who get HS >> domain names care about anonymity. > You are correct that Namecoin addresses are linkable. I think it's > likely that Zerocoin or CoinJoin will be implemented for Namecoin in > the future, which would solve the issue. In the meantime, I think the > best way to get mostly-anonymous namecoins would be to obtain > bitcoins, run them through a mixer, and use the resulting anonymized > bitcoins to purchase namecoins on an exchange. (Most exchanges don't > ask for identification unless you're using government-issued > currency.) I think some exchanges block Tor, so it might be necessary > to use a proxy or VPN between Tor and the exchange. Zerocoin/etc. seems like a bigger project than Namecoin. I think implementing Namecoin support now and then waiting for Zerocoin to be established and used is not going to be very efficient. >> Yes, you seem like a good match for this project. >> >> Familiriaty with YaCy will be very useful indeed. >> >> On the crawler side, may I suggest you to also look into archive.org's >> Heritrix crawler? Someone told me that it's what the cool kids use >> these days for crawling the web but I haven't used it myself. > Thanks for the tip, I will look into Heritrix. >> I think you would be a good candidate for this project. However, be >> warned that it's likely that more good candidates will apply for this >> project so it might be a tough competition. > Is there a way that I could submit two proposals (one for each of the > projects I listed), so that if there's tough competition for one > project I can still be considered for the other? Or does GSoC only > permit one proposal per student per organization? > AFAIK, you can submit multiple proposals. Even multiple proposals through different FOSS projects. Like I suggested in my previous mail, I would even encourage you to submit multiple proposals since the HS search engine project has gotten plenty of student attention lately. Cheers! _______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
