From cacopatane at gmail.com Thu Jun 1 13:39:23 2006 From: cacopatane at gmail.com (Caco Patane) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:39:23 -0300 Subject: [freenet-chat] Times Online Article (Keep prying etes off your files) Message-ID: Freenet is mentioned on the following article: http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,20411-2205269,00.html Cheers, Caco_Patane -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GIT dpu s:-- a-- C++ UL+++ P-- L++ E--- W+++ N o-- K- w--- O---- M V- PS+++ PE-- Y+ PGP t+ 5-- X+ R+++ tv-- b++ DI-- D++ G++ e h+ r-- y** ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From RKent20551 at cs.com Thu Jun 1 14:06:57 2006 From: RKent20551 at cs.com (RKent20551 at cs.com) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:06:57 EDT Subject: [freenet-chat] Crisis Among "Internet Police" Revealed in Video Message-ID: <448.29c9932.31b04e81@cs.com> The Friends of Cuban Libraries http://www.friendsofcubanlibraries.org June 1, 2006 Crisis Among "Internet Police" Revealed in Video A video filmed at Cuba's University of Information Sciences has revealed a crisis within the elite being trained to administer the island's high-tech industry, including the branch of the security police which tries to suppress access to the World Wide Web. The secret video, filmed on Feb. 18 and designated for restricted viewing among the island's ruling elite, was smuggled out of Cuba and placed on the Internet by La Nueva Cuba, an electronic journal critical of the Castro government. The 58-minute long Spanish language video, entitled "Necessary Point of Reflection," can be seen at: (http://lanuevacuba.com/video_Ucien_info_asp/guerra_cibernetica.wmv). The video shows a panel consisting of the University's rector, Melchor Felix Gill, and three student leaders, including the head of the local Communist Youth organization, lecturing an assembly of students and faculty. The panel members sternly denounce "serious violations" of university regulations: large numbers of students and faculty members have been detected surfing the Internet, distributing passwords allowing other persons to access the World Wide Web, e-mailing people outside of Cuba without authorization, and setting up clandestine chat rooms. These "serious security violations" are a breach of Cuban laws which outlaw access to the Internet and the possession of unlicensed computers, except for a small number of persons considered trustworthy by the regime. The secret video contradicts public claims by the Cuban government that the Internet is readily accessible to all Cuban citizens. Many nations devote resources to censoring or blocking individual websites, but the Castro regime is one of the few governments which tries to completely ban all access to the World Wide Web, except for a privileged few. Foreign tourists are allowed to surf the World Wide Web at a few Internet cafes, to which the average Cuban is denied entrance, but the tourists are charged six dollars per hour or more for this privilege. Cuba has been named among the world's "Ten Worst Enemies of the Internet" by Reporters Without Borders. In addition to criminalizing access to the Internet, Cuba also persecutes a group of volunteers who have opened uncensored libraries throughout the island in an effort to challenge government control of information. A number of Cuba's independent librarians, now serving 20-year sentences following one-day trials, have been adopted as "prisoners of conscience" by Amnesty International, which is demanding their immediate release. In the video smuggled out of Cuba, the offending students and faculty at Havana's prestigious University of Information Sciences are accused of using their expertise and government-supplied equipment to circumvent the information security laws they are being trained to enforce. The regime is especially alarmed by the fact that these alleged crimes are being committed by the students of an elite university, who are subjected to intense scrutiny by the State Security police before admission; 80% of the students at the University of Information Sciences are members of the Communist Youth organization. In the course of the video, as the camera scans members of the audience whose facial expressions range from impassivity to defiance, the students and faculty are reminded that they are banned from surfing the Internet outside of supervised classroom exercises. Details on the cases of four students expelled for breaking the rules, complete with mug shots, are highlighted by the panel members. The assembled students and faculty are warned that new legislation will make such security breaches punishable by prison terms of up to five years, and they are urged to serve as informers against any colleagues who commit "crimes" such as surfing the World Wide Web outside of class. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060601/12b61ef0/attachment.htm From david at rebirthing.co.nz Fri Jun 2 22:05:29 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 10:05:29 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] freedisk: pre-Alpha testers wanted Message-ID: <4480B629.6050808@rebirthing.co.nz> Hi, This is a call for pre-alpha testers for freedisk, the Freenet virtual disk framework. What I'll need you to have is: - curiosity and interest - a few bits of spare time on and off over the next few weeks - freenet 0.7 set up and working somewhere on your LAN - a linux-based OS - root access to this OS (for installation of packages) - ability to build kernel modules What I'll need you to do for this stage of testing is: - install a small number of third-party packages, one of which (FUSE) needs you to build/install/load a kernel module - install the pyfcp package, which includes the Freedisk framework - report to me by email or IRC re any problems you run into - play around with the freenetfs - go through a few iterations of reinstalling pyfcp as I sort out the wrinkles Anyone interested, please contact me off-list using my other email address: rebirth at orcon dot net dot nz -- Cheers David From ian at locut.us Tue Jun 6 15:21:13 2006 From: ian at locut.us (Ian Clarke) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:21:13 -0700 Subject: [freenet-chat] Poll on anonymous P2P apps Message-ID: We aren't doing too well so far: http://board.planetpeer.de/index.php/topic,1730.0.html From sitharus at sitharus.com Wed Jun 7 10:08:05 2006 From: sitharus at sitharus.com (Phillip Hutchings) Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 22:08:05 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] ANN: Ruby FCP library Message-ID: After hours of hard work I've created a Ruby FCP client library. You can grab it from http://www.sitharus.com/~sitharus/freenetr/freenet_client.rb, browse http://www.sitharus.com/~sitharus/freenetr/ for an example, check indexer.rb. Docs are at http://www.sitharus.com/~sitharus/freenetr/doc/ It currently supports basic put and get. I'm going to add the more complex puts soon. generate_ssk should also work. Persistent requests won't work properly yet, I haven't put much thought in to how to manage them. -- Phillip Hutchings http://www.sitharus.com/ From david at rebirthing.co.nz Thu Jun 8 00:49:01 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:49:01 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] ANN: Ruby FCP library In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <448773FD.7090904@rebirthing.co.nz> Phillip Hutchings wrote: > After hours of hard work I've created a Ruby FCP client library. You > can grab it from > http://www.sitharus.com/~sitharus/freenetr/freenet_client.rb, browse > http://www.sitharus.com/~sitharus/freenetr/ for an example, check > indexer.rb. Docs are at > http://www.sitharus.com/~sitharus/freenetr/doc/ > > It currently supports basic put and get. I'm going to add the more > complex puts soon. generate_ssk should also work. > > Persistent requests won't work properly yet, I haven't put much > thought in to how to manage them. Way to go! :) Yet another *real programming language* supported for FCP! Some checklist items if you've got some time: 1) Is it in svn yet? 2) Have you stuck up a freesite for it? 3) If there's a freesite, have you submitted it to frost? Also makes me want to ask (the group): 1) Is the old C 'fcptools' library and its utils being updated to FCPv2? Or is it sliding down towards /dev/null? 2) Are there FCP libs in the works for Perl? C++? VB? C#? Tcl? Forth? BF? Any volunteers for these? Cheers David From sitharus at sitharus.com Thu Jun 8 02:42:03 2006 From: sitharus at sitharus.com (Phillip Hutchings) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 14:42:03 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] ANN: Ruby FCP library In-Reply-To: <448773FD.7090904@rebirthing.co.nz> References: <448773FD.7090904@rebirthing.co.nz> Message-ID: > Way to go! :) > Yet another *real programming language* supported for FCP! > > Some checklist items if you've got some time: > 1) Is it in svn yet? > 2) Have you stuck up a freesite for it? > 3) If there's a freesite, have you submitted it to frost? 1) No, need to ask nextgens now that it's in a release state 2) No, waiting for me to implement ClientPutDiskDir and figure out how USKs work 3) See above ;) Lets see how much free time I get... -- Phillip Hutchings http://www.sitharus.com/ From eldred at gmx.de Thu Jun 8 10:06:10 2006 From: eldred at gmx.de (Eldred) Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:06:10 +0200 Subject: [freenet-chat] Demonstration in Berlin (German) Message-ID: <20060608100610.91190@gmx.net> "Freenet is hopefully a good last resort, but the option of a technical last resort should not discourage people from fighting oppression in all of its forms through more conventional political means." - Ian Clarke Freenets Gr?nder Ian Clarke mahnt mit Recht an, dass Freenet nur einen letzten technischen Ausweg darstellt und dass die B?rger dar?ber nicht nachlassen sollten, Freiheitsbeschr?nkungen auf herk?mmliche politische Weise zu bek?mpfen. Am Samstag, den 17. Juni, gehen wir f?r unsere Freiheiten in Berlin auf die Stra?e. Alle deutschen Freenet-Nutzer sind hiermit aufgerufen, sich an der Demonstration unter dem Motto "Freiheit statt Sicherheitswahn" zu beteiligen. Treffpunkt ist der Alexanderplatz um 14 Uhr. Der Protestzug beginnt um 15 Uhr. Den Ansto? gab der Arbeitskreis Vorratsdatenspeicherung, der sich dagegen wendet, dass die elektronischen Spuren der 450 Millionen EU-B?rger bald verdachtsunabh?ngig sechs bis 24 Monate gespeichert werden sollen. Wir werden au?erdem von verschiedenen Organisationen unterst?tzt, darunter sind Attac, der Chaos Computer Club (CCC), das Forum InformatikerInnen f?r Frieden und gesellschaftliche Verantwortung, das Netzwerk Neue Medien, der FoeBuD und der FFII. http://www.FreiheitStattSicherheitswahn.de ? Homepage der Demonstration Bei Fragen meldet euch gerne bei mir. Eldred -- Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen! Ideal f?r Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Thu Jun 8 12:40:40 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 13:40:40 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] New Scientist article on harvesting social network sites (partial text) Message-ID: <20060608124040.GA3441@amphibian.dyndns.org> Page 30-31, New Scientist issue 2555, 10 June 2006. Keep out of MySpace: Social networking websites could be the latest target of the US National Security Agency New Scientist has discovered that the Pentagon's National Security Agency, which specializes in eavesdropping and code-breaking, is funding research into the mass harvesting of the information that people post about themselves on social networks. And it could harness advances in internet technology - specifically the forthcoming "semantic web" championed by the web standards organization W3C - to combine data from social networking websites with details such as banking, retail and property records, allowing the NSA to build extensive, all-embracing personal profiles of individuals. ... Meanwhile, the NSA is pursuing its plans to tap the web, since phone logs have limited scope. They can only be used to build a very basic picture of someone's contact network, a process sometimes called "connecting the dots". Clusters of people in highly connected groups become apparent, as do people with few connections who appear to be intermediaries between such groups. The idea is to see by how many links of "degrees" separate people from, say, a member of a blacklisted organization. By adding the online social networking data to its phone analyses, the NSA could connect people at deeper levels, such as taking flying lessons. Typically online social networking sites ask members to enter details of their immediate and extended circles of friends, whose blogs they might follow. People often list other facets of their personality, including political, sexual, entertainment, media and sporting preferences too. Some go much further, and a few have lost their jobs by publicly descibing drinking and drug-taking exploits... "You should always assume anything you write online is stapled to your resume. People don't realise you get Googled just to get a job interview these days,", says [ PGP chief security officer ] Callas. Other data the NSA could combine with social networking details includes information on purchases, where we go (available from cellphone records...) and what major financial transactions we make, such as buying a house. Right now this is difficult to do, because today's web is stuffed with data in incompatible formats. Enter the semantic web, which aims to iron out these incompatibilities over the next few years via a common data structure called the Resource Definition Framework... "RDF turns the web into a kind of universal spreadsheet that is readable by computers as well as people," says David de Roure at the University of Southampton, UK, who is an adviser to the W3C. "It means you will be able to ask a website questions you couldn't ask before, or perform calculations on the data it contains."... [the NSA]'s interest in [harvesting the semantic web] is evident in a funding footnote to a research paper delivered at the W3C's WWW2006 conference in Edinburgh, UK, in late May. That paper, entitled Semantic Analytics on Social Networks, by a research team lead by Amrit Sheth of the University of Georgia in Athens and Anupam Joshi of the University of Maryland in Baltimore reveals how data from online social networks and other databases can be combined to uncover facts about people. The footnote said the work was part-funded by an organization called ARDA. ... Chief among ARDA's aims is to make sense of the massive amounts of data the NSA collects - some of its sources grow by around 4 million gigabytes a month. ... So the team developed software that combined data from the RDF tags of online social network Friend of a Friend (www.foaf-project.org), where people simply outline who is in their circle of friends, and a semantically tagged commercial bibliographic database called DBLP, which lists the authors of computer science papers. Joshi says their system found conflicts of interest between potential reviewers and authors pitching papers for an internet conference. "It certainly made relationship finding between people much easier", Joshi says. "It picked up softer [ non-obvious ] conflicts we would not have seen before." The technology will work in exactly the same way for intelligence and national security services and for financial dealings, such as detecting insider trading, the authors say. Linking "who knows who" with purchasing or bank records could highlight groups of terrorists, money launderers of blacklisted groups, says Sheth. ... [ ARDA renamed to Disruptive Technologies Office ... ] ... [ references to the Total Information Awareness project, which was shelved, but elements continue in the September 2003 Defence Appropriations Act ] ... Privacy groups worry that "automated intelligence profiling" could sully people's reputations or even lead ot miscarriages of justice - especially since the data from social networking sites may often be inaccurate, untrue, or incomplete, De Roure warns. But Tim Finin, a colleague of Joshi's, thinks that the spread of such technology is unstoppable. "Information is getting easier to merge, fuse and draw inferences from. There is money to be made and control to be gained in doing so. And I don't see much that will stop it," he says. Callas thinks people have to wise up about how much information about themselves they should divulge on public websites. It may sound obvious, he says, but being discrete is a big part of maintaining privacy. Time, perhaps, to hit the delete button. -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060608/937ac125/attachment.pgp From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Thu Jun 8 13:07:06 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 14:07:06 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] New Scientist article on harvesting social network sites (analysis) In-Reply-To: <20060608124040.GA3441@amphibian.dyndns.org> References: <20060608124040.GA3441@amphibian.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20060608130706.GA3459@amphibian.dyndns.org> So... apart from the general reminder not to blab too much online if you care about your privacy (and especially on myspace/linkedin/etc), what relevance does this have to us? 1. Joining the dots is easy. Between phone records and email records, the NSA have "joining the dots" pretty much sewn up. "phone logs .. can only be used to build a very basic picture of someone's contact network, a process sometimes called 'connecting the dots'. Clusters of people in highly connected groups become apparent, as do people with few connections who appear to be intermediaries between such groups. The idea is to see by how many links or 'degrees' separate people from say, a member of a blacklisted organization" 2. Identifying the nature of the connections is hard. Social networking sites offer a short-cut, providing a) whether these connections are regarded as significant/worthy of record (people's enemies won't normally be added on orkut), and b) what shared interests connect the two individuals. "By adding online social networking data to its phone analyses, the NSA could connect people at deeper levels, through shared activities ... " 3. Semantic Web will make this easier. IMHO you have two choices: Either a) don't give away any information on the web, or b) build tools that make it as easy as possible to harvest the semantic web and find out as much as possible about people, just as the NSA are. You don't have access to bank records and cellphone locator fixes, but nonetheless you can get a good idea of what's out there. Now, how do we apply this? A. The NSA already knows your contact list, because they read your email headers and watch your phone logs. It's the strength of the connection, and the context of the connection, that is harder to establish. B. Darknet links are considerably harder to detect than MySpace/Orkut/etc links. They require packet analysis hardware at the ISP, and may require network level correlation / flow analysis for more advanced transports. Unfortunately, this is entirely plausible in the future. C. Darknet links, assuming they can be detected, tell the NSA (or Chinese intel, or the RIAA working with law enforcement as provided for under pending EU legislation) that: a) There is probably a social connection, (unless it's a #freenet-refs connection, as most such links are; correlate with email records etc to find out if it's a real social connection), AND b) There is probably a certain level of trust. Right now, connecting to somebody on darknet requires a significant level of trust because of a lack of countermeasures against malicious "friends", but it will always require a greater level of trust than a "random stranger" link; "random strangers" will often be agents of the Evil Powers attempting to infiltrate the darknet, so you at least have to establish that they aren't bots! D. If Freenet is huge, and relatively mainstream, and your darknet peers are similar to your AIM buddy list, and there are reasonable countermeasures against treachery, then darknet connections don't necessarily tell Them much more than your AIM list does. However, if freenet remains largely a haven for extreme libertarians, terrorists, paedophiles, and geeks, then being connected to somebody on Freenet tells Them a great deal, and the emphasis has to be on steganography. E. So we have an interesting dilemma: - The more hostile the environment (the more the risk of being discovered running a node, the smaller the network, etc), the more information (and leverage) is available to a party discovering that two people are connected over the darknet. Extreme stego transports and so on may reduce the risk of traffic analysis, and in such circumstances, users will be willing to put up with the reduced performance and increased hassle imposed thereby. But this will reduce the number of users further, to a degree. The rewards for treachery are also higher, and the likely available resources on the attacker's side per user will also be higher. - The less hostile the environment, the less the need for darknet, in theory, since it may not be harvested and blocked. On the other hand, darknet may well be a superior topology performance-wise once it reaches a certain density (look at the weeks it takes to get good performance on 0.5!). But the less hostile the environment, the more people are on the darknet. And the more people who are on the darknet, the faster it grows, the more useful it is, the safer it is, the less information is given away by the knowledge of a darknet link. Essentially, the more hostile the environment, (and also the weaker the security of freenet itself against treachery) the greater the strength of the social connection required for darknet, and the more significant the fact of a darknet connection becomes. The less hostile the environment, the closer your darknet connection list is to your AIM connection list / email addressbook, the less information is given away by knowing about a darknet link. On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 01:40:40PM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > Page 30-31, New Scientist issue 2555, 10 June 2006. > Keep out of MySpace: Social networking websites could be the latest > target of the US National Security Agency > > New Scientist has discovered that the Pentagon's National Security > Agency, which specializes in eavesdropping and code-breaking, is funding > research into the mass harvesting of the information that people post > about themselves on social networks. And it could harness advances in > internet technology - specifically the forthcoming "semantic web" > championed by the web standards organization W3C - to combine data > from social networking websites with details such as banking, retail and > property records, allowing the NSA to build extensive, all-embracing > personal profiles of individuals. > ... > Meanwhile, the NSA is pursuing its plans to tap the web, since phone > logs have limited scope. They can only be used to build a very basic > picture of someone's contact network, a process sometimes called > "connecting the dots". Clusters of people in highly connected groups > become apparent, as do people with few connections who appear to be > intermediaries between such groups. The idea is to see by how many links > of "degrees" separate people from, say, a member of a blacklisted > organization. > > By adding the online social networking data to its phone analyses, the > NSA could connect people at deeper levels, such as taking flying > lessons. Typically online social networking sites ask members to enter > details of their immediate and extended circles of friends, whose blogs > they might follow. People often list other facets of their personality, > including political, sexual, entertainment, media and sporting > preferences too. Some go much further, and a few have lost their jobs by > publicly descibing drinking and drug-taking exploits... > > "You should always assume anything you write online is stapled to your > resume. People don't realise you get Googled just to get a job interview > these days,", says [ PGP chief security officer ] Callas. > > Other data the NSA could combine with social networking details includes > information on purchases, where we go (available from cellphone > records...) and what major financial transactions we make, such as > buying a house. > > Right now this is difficult to do, because today's web is stuffed with > data in incompatible formats. Enter the semantic web, which aims to iron > out these incompatibilities over the next few years via a common data > structure called the Resource Definition Framework... > > "RDF turns the web into a kind of universal spreadsheet that is readable > by computers as well as people," says David de Roure at the University > of Southampton, UK, who is an adviser to the W3C. "It means you will be > able to ask a website questions you couldn't ask before, or perform > calculations on the data it contains."... > > [the NSA]'s interest in [harvesting the semantic web] is evident in a > funding footnote to a research paper delivered at the W3C's WWW2006 > conference in Edinburgh, UK, in late May. > > That paper, entitled Semantic Analytics on Social Networks, by a > research team lead by Amrit Sheth of the University of Georgia in Athens > and Anupam Joshi of the University of Maryland in Baltimore reveals how > data from online social networks and other databases can be combined to > uncover facts about people. The footnote said the work was part-funded > by an organization called ARDA. > > ... Chief among ARDA's aims is to make sense of the massive amounts of > data the NSA collects - some of its sources grow by around 4 million > gigabytes a month. > ... > So the team developed software that combined data from the RDF tags of > online social network Friend of a Friend (www.foaf-project.org), where > people simply outline who is in their circle of friends, and a > semantically tagged commercial bibliographic database called DBLP, which > lists the authors of computer science papers. > > Joshi says their system found conflicts of interest between potential > reviewers and authors pitching papers for an internet conference. "It > certainly made relationship finding between people much easier", Joshi > says. "It picked up softer [ non-obvious ] conflicts we would not have > seen before." > > The technology will work in exactly the same way for intelligence and > national security services and for financial dealings, such as detecting > insider trading, the authors say. Linking "who knows who" with > purchasing or bank records could highlight groups of terrorists, money > launderers of blacklisted groups, says Sheth. > > ... [ ARDA renamed to Disruptive Technologies Office ... ] > ... [ references to the Total Information Awareness project, which was > shelved, but elements continue in the September 2003 Defence > Appropriations Act ] ... > > Privacy groups worry that "automated intelligence profiling" could sully > people's reputations or even lead ot miscarriages of justice - > especially since the data from social networking sites may often be > inaccurate, untrue, or incomplete, De Roure warns. > > But Tim Finin, a colleague of Joshi's, thinks that the spread of such > technology is unstoppable. "Information is getting easier to merge, fuse > and draw inferences from. There is money to be made and control to be > gained in doing so. And I don't see much that will stop it," he says. > > Callas thinks people have to wise up about how much information about > themselves they should divulge on public websites. It may sound obvious, > he says, but being discrete is a big part of maintaining privacy. Time, > perhaps, to hit the delete button. > > > -- > Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > _______________________________________________ > chat mailing list > chat at freenetproject.org > Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat > Or mailto:chat-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060608/bc1aa389/attachment.pgp From cacopatane at gmail.com Thu Jun 8 13:15:57 2006 From: cacopatane at gmail.com (Caco Patane) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 10:15:57 -0300 Subject: [freenet-chat] Internet a breeding ground for crime (Article from The Globe and Mail, Canada) Message-ID: Another article mentioning Freenet: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060607.gtcrimejun7/BNStory/Technology/home [quote] He said potential terrorists can find all the tools they need on-line, adding that he has seen some radical Islamic sites containing information on recruitment, training, target selection, weapon construction and secret communication techniques. Sharing such information anonymously is also a simple matter, with certain pieces of software such as Freenet and Invisible IRC (Internet Relay Chat) developing programs to protect the identity of their users. "There is no denying that it's a race against time and technology that governments cannot always win," Harris said. [/quote] And what about the benefits of sharing information anonymously? Saludos, Caco_Patane From sitharus at sitharus.com Thu Jun 8 22:00:57 2006 From: sitharus at sitharus.com (Phillip Hutchings) Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 10:00:57 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] Internet a breeding ground for crime (Article from The Globe and Mail, Canada) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > And what about the benefits of sharing information anonymously? Never let truth get in the way of a good story. Media is always biased, but people still believe it. -- Phillip Hutchings http://www.sitharus.com/ From RKent20551 at cs.com Sat Jun 10 12:34:49 2006 From: RKent20551 at cs.com (RKent20551 at cs.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 08:34:49 EDT Subject: [freenet-chat] Students Punished for Surfing Web Message-ID: <4c4.f6eb26.31bc1669@cs.com> ( http://www.friendsofcubanlibraries.org ) Students Punished for Internet Scheme By Frances Robles, Miami Herald, June 10, 2006 ( http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/14785313.htm ) EXCERPTS: Cuba's Internet police, the Office of Information Security, caught the students at the University of Information Sciences (UCI) using school property to charge $30 a month for stolen Internet passwords, according to a video of a campus meeting, smuggled out of the island. Critics of Fidel Castro's government say the video illustrates the lengths to which young Cubans are willing to go to access information in a place where the government tightly controls all information. A university whose dean says in the video is aimed at ''training the guerrillas of the new era'' instead found its students using their skills to hack their way to the outside world.... 'It's easy for you to say: `They were using stolen passwords or appropriating government resources,' but that's because here we have the option of using the Internet,'' said Antonio Rivera, editor of the online news site La Nueva Cuba, which obtained the video. ``They have no other alternatives...'' ''We have to be very careful of these semi-clandestine chats which are not official chats,'' university chancellor Melchor Gil Morell, former vice-minister of Information and Communications, said on the video. ``The majority wind up hurting the revolution and conducting illegal acts.'' He said the government will revise its penal code to make illegal Internet access punishable by up to five years in prison.... "The war the enemy has against the revolution takes place on many fronts, including the Internet,'' Gil said.... The video, filmed Feb. 17, was shot two weeks after Cuban dissident journalist [and independent librarian] Guillermo Fari?as began a hunger strike to demand Internet access. His e-mail account was cut off by the government after Fari?as was quoted in a Miami Herald article. Fari?as has been fed intravenously for more than four months and is in critical condition, dissidents said. CONTROLLED INTERNET Reporters Without Borders last year denounced Cuba as one of a dozen nations with the most controlled and least accessible Internet, grouping the country with Iran and Vietnam.... ''One of the things young people here most want is Internet, or satellite TV, or anything that offers different options than the ones offered here,'' dissident Vladimiro Roca said in a telephone interview from Havana. ``Young people have great initiative. They are fast at getting what they want. One way or another, they find it....'' University officials said in the video that many students and even professors were using the passwords to access unauthorized Web sites. ''We're going to sit down and visit them,'' university official Silvano Merced said in the video. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060610/25a14f62/attachment.htm From david at rebirthing.co.nz Sun Jun 11 12:19:10 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 00:19:10 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] ANN: pyFreenet v0.1.7, new freesitemgr Message-ID: <448C0A3E.6040002@rebirthing.co.nz> Hi, I've just released version 0.1.7 of pyFreenet The most significant change is a major rewrite of the freesitemgr freesite insertion utility. freesitemgr now features 'resumable' operation. This means that if it is interrupted half-way (by the user pressing Ctrl-C, or the node dying), it can be re-run, and it will pick up where it left off. This means that users inserting large freesites can just keep trying if the node keeps dying, and eventually they'll get the full freesite in. Also, freesitemgr now stores its info in the *directory* ~/.freesitemgr, instead of the *file* ~/.freesites. To import your existing sites, get their private URIs out of ~/.freesites, and add them into the new freesitemgr with 'freesitemgr add'. Other changes: - cleaner logging/verbosity options - default priority for all operations is now 3 (gets were failing at priority 4) Any bugs? Post them to the pyFreenet bugs page on mantis Download sites: http://www.freenet.org.nz/python/pyfcp USK at T4gW1EvwSrR9AOlBT2hFnWy5wK0rtd5rGhf6bp75tVo,E9uFCy0NhiTbR0jVQkY77doaWtxTrkS9kuMrzOtNzSQ,AQABAAE/pyfcp/0 Cheers David From david at rebirthing.co.nz Wed Jun 14 00:45:04 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 12:45:04 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] ANN: pyfcp0.1.8 (+freesitemgr) Message-ID: <448F5C10.4010401@rebirthing.co.nz> Hi, Announcing release of version 0.1.8 of pyfcp (with freesitemgr freesite insertion tool). Main change is a complete rewrite of freesitemgr: - freesitemgr now uses the node global queue - 'freesitemgr update' now just submits inserts to the queue and exits once these inserts have been sent to the node (it no longer waits for the node to notify completion) - queued inserts have persistence=forever, so should survive node restarts (that is, if the node doesn't forget) - if node still has Alzheimer's (forgets queued items), freesitemgr will detect this and resubmit - subsequent runs of 'freesitemgr update' now reconcile the stored site state against the retrieved queue info, so you can also use 'freesitemgr update' to poll the insert states of your freesites - freesitemgr no longer uses ~/.freesites, it now stores everything in ~/.freesitemgr/*, in much more readable/hackable files It is recommended that once you get your freesites set up, you stick the command 'freesitemgr update' (or 'freesitemgr -v update') into your crontab. Doze users please note - no attempt has yet been made to test freesitemgr in a doze environment. That's the next item on my todo. YMMV. Download locations: 1. svn, from 'pyFreenet' 2. web, via www.freenet.org.nz/python/pyfcp 3. freenet, via USK at T4gW1EvwSrR9AOlBT2hFnWy5wK0rtd5rGhf6bp75tVo,E9uFCy0NhiTbR0jVQkY77doaWtxTrkS9kuMrzOtNzSQ,AQABAAE/pyfcp/0 If you hit any problems, please file a bug on mantis against project (https://bugs.freenetproject.org/) against project 'PyFreenet'. Cheers David From david at rebirthing.co.nz Thu Jun 15 12:02:41 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 00:02:41 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] ideas for a freenet 'name server' framework Message-ID: <44914C61.5040802@rebirthing.co.nz> Hi I've been thinking about ways to get human-friendly, yet secure, URIs under freenet. (KSKs are nice, just a shame they're so easily subverted). My thoughts so far are: 1) Users would trust one or more 'namesites'. For instance, if I have confidence in Alice's 'namesite', I would stick in my ~/.freenames file an entry: alice freenet:USK at alicepubkey/alice/0 2) If I want to browse a freesite, with the human-friendly URL of http://falun-gong.free, my client would look in ~/.freenames, see the entry for 'alice', then try alice's uri for 'falun-gong'. 3) If the 'alice' namesite has an entry for 'falun-gong', then the URI: USK at alicepubkey/alice/0/falun-gong should return the physical URI of the 'falun-gong' site I'm looking for, which might be: USK at falungpubkey/falun-gong/0 4) Alice might trust other namesites, so her namesite would have a file 'USK at alicepubkey/alice/0/.forward which lists URIs for other namesites which Alice considers trustworthy. So if Alice didn't have an entry for 'falun-gong', maybe one of the namesites listed in her .forward file might. So, how would this get used in practice? One way I've thought of is to implement a basic name server for local use only. This name server would have a very simple socket interface, supporting commands like 'lookup' (look up a name), 'list' (list the trusted namesites), 'add' (add a namesite), 'remove' (remove a namesite). Then the last step is to write an http proxy over the top of fproxy which simply follows the above method to translate human-readable URIs such as 'http://falun-gong.free' to 'http://127.0.0.1:8888/USK at falungongpubkey/falun-gong/0/index.html' As for the service side, running a namesite would be very easy. It would just be a freesite where the mapping from (say) foo.free is implemented as a relative path /foo, which contains just the real freenet URI 'USK at blahblah/foo/0'. An alternative, which would reduce the number of files on the freesite, would be to list everything in one file, maybe '/.bulk'. But before I launch into something like this, the question to ask is whether others might see value in having human-readable yet secure and (relatively) trustworthy URIs. For me, I would see value, because I'm getting a bit tired of the current URIs being so long that I can't see the file extension in my browser address or status bars. Anyway, your thoughts? -- Kind regards David From nextgens at freenetproject.org Thu Jun 15 13:33:46 2006 From: nextgens at freenetproject.org (Florent =?iso-8859-1?Q?Daigni=E8re_=28NextGen$=29?=) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:33:46 +0200 Subject: [freenet-chat] ideas for a freenet 'name server' framework In-Reply-To: <44914C61.5040802@rebirthing.co.nz> References: <44914C61.5040802@rebirthing.co.nz> Message-ID: <20060615133345.GA14876@freenetproject.org> * David McNab [2006-06-16 00:02:41]: > Hi > > I've been thinking about ways to get human-friendly, yet secure, URIs > under freenet. > > (KSKs are nice, just a shame they're so easily subverted). > > My thoughts so far are: > > 1) Users would trust one or more 'namesites'. For instance, if I have > confidence in Alice's 'namesite', I would stick in my ~/.freenames file > an entry: > > alice freenet:USK at alicepubkey/alice/0 > > 2) If I want to browse a freesite, with the human-friendly URL of > http://falun-gong.free, my client would look in ~/.freenames, see the > entry for 'alice', then try alice's uri for 'falun-gong'. > > 3) If the 'alice' namesite has an entry for 'falun-gong', then the URI: > > USK at alicepubkey/alice/0/falun-gong > > should return the physical URI of the 'falun-gong' site I'm looking for, > which might be: > > USK at falungpubkey/falun-gong/0 > > 4) Alice might trust other namesites, so her namesite would have > a file 'USK at alicepubkey/alice/0/.forward > > which lists URIs for other namesites which Alice considers trustworthy. > So if Alice didn't have an entry for 'falun-gong', maybe one of the > namesites listed in her .forward file might. > > So, how would this get used in practice? > > One way I've thought of is to implement a basic name server for local > use only. This name server would have a very simple socket interface, > supporting commands like 'lookup' (look up a name), 'list' (list the > trusted namesites), 'add' (add a namesite), 'remove' (remove a namesite). > > Then the last step is to write an http proxy over the top of fproxy > which simply follows the above method to translate human-readable URIs > such as 'http://falun-gong.free' to > 'http://127.0.0.1:8888/USK at falungongpubkey/falun-gong/0/index.html' > > As for the service side, running a namesite would be very easy. It would > just be a freesite where the mapping from (say) foo.free is implemented > as a relative path /foo, which contains just the real freenet URI > 'USK at blahblah/foo/0'. > > An alternative, which would reduce the number of files on the freesite, > would be to list everything in one file, maybe '/.bulk'. > > But before I launch into something like this, the question to ask is > whether others might see value in having human-readable yet secure and > (relatively) trustworthy URIs. > > For me, I would see value, because I'm getting a bit tired of the > current URIs being so long that I can't see the file extension in my > browser address or status bars. > > Anyway, your thoughts? > If such a thing has to be implemented, it has to be done within the node :) ... Fill in a feature request ;) NextGen$ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060615/a3d6d0cb/attachment.pgp From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Thu Jun 15 13:36:14 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:36:14 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] ideas for a freenet 'name server' framework In-Reply-To: <44914C61.5040802@rebirthing.co.nz> References: <44914C61.5040802@rebirthing.co.nz> Message-ID: <20060615133614.GA3557@amphibian.dyndns.org> Interesting. KSKs aren't *that* insecure: - They _can_ be spammed. - They _can_ be decrypted from the store (with a dictionary attack). - They _can_ be faked (with a dictionary attack). - However, an existing KSK takes precedence when requesting or inserting, and when a new one tries to overwrite the old one, the old one propagates. The only really fatal problem here is that they are spammable. Of course, so is classic DNS, as we have discovered. :( If you want something which isn't spammable, then indeed you need central repositories. One way to do this is just like DNS - have several *named* master registries: http://bob.cofe/ (look bob up on cofe) http://joe.freehoo/ (look joe up on freehoo) You might have a unifying search which checks multiple repositories in order, but generally that sort of ambiguity is dangerous. Obviously we need a consensus mapping of names to repositories; you've already covered that, it's something that needs to be manually maintained. The bottom line is that the best security comes from using SSKs and CHKs. However, KSKs have their uses, and such a scheme may also have its uses. But I recommend the multiple-named-repos approach, for obvious security reasons. On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 12:02:41AM +1200, David McNab wrote: > Hi > > I've been thinking about ways to get human-friendly, yet secure, URIs > under freenet. > > (KSKs are nice, just a shame they're so easily subverted). > > My thoughts so far are: > > 1) Users would trust one or more 'namesites'. For instance, if I have > confidence in Alice's 'namesite', I would stick in my ~/.freenames file > an entry: > > alice freenet:USK at alicepubkey/alice/0 > > 2) If I want to browse a freesite, with the human-friendly URL of > http://falun-gong.free, my client would look in ~/.freenames, see the > entry for 'alice', then try alice's uri for 'falun-gong'. > > 3) If the 'alice' namesite has an entry for 'falun-gong', then the URI: > > USK at alicepubkey/alice/0/falun-gong > > should return the physical URI of the 'falun-gong' site I'm looking for, > which might be: > > USK at falungpubkey/falun-gong/0 > > 4) Alice might trust other namesites, so her namesite would have > a file 'USK at alicepubkey/alice/0/.forward > > which lists URIs for other namesites which Alice considers trustworthy. > So if Alice didn't have an entry for 'falun-gong', maybe one of the > namesites listed in her .forward file might. > > So, how would this get used in practice? > > One way I've thought of is to implement a basic name server for local > use only. This name server would have a very simple socket interface, > supporting commands like 'lookup' (look up a name), 'list' (list the > trusted namesites), 'add' (add a namesite), 'remove' (remove a namesite). > > Then the last step is to write an http proxy over the top of fproxy > which simply follows the above method to translate human-readable URIs > such as 'http://falun-gong.free' to > 'http://127.0.0.1:8888/USK at falungongpubkey/falun-gong/0/index.html' > > As for the service side, running a namesite would be very easy. It would > just be a freesite where the mapping from (say) foo.free is implemented > as a relative path /foo, which contains just the real freenet URI > 'USK at blahblah/foo/0'. > > An alternative, which would reduce the number of files on the freesite, > would be to list everything in one file, maybe '/.bulk'. > > But before I launch into something like this, the question to ask is > whether others might see value in having human-readable yet secure and > (relatively) trustworthy URIs. > > For me, I would see value, because I'm getting a bit tired of the > current URIs being so long that I can't see the file extension in my > browser address or status bars. > > Anyway, your thoughts? > > -- > Kind regards > David > > _______________________________________________ > chat mailing list > chat at freenetproject.org > Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat > Or mailto:chat-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060615/defe62ac/attachment.pgp From ian at locut.us Thu Jun 15 17:04:47 2006 From: ian at locut.us (Ian Clarke) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:04:47 -0700 Subject: [freenet-chat] ideas for a freenet 'name server' framework In-Reply-To: <44914C61.5040802@rebirthing.co.nz> References: <44914C61.5040802@rebirthing.co.nz> Message-ID: <296217F1-8D46-414D-896A-D01D1A8574B5@locut.us> I think the fact that DNS has evolved into a primitive search engine (typing www.dictionary.com to find a dictionary website) was always rather ugly - and I'm not sure it is something we want to emulate. Better to implement a proper search engine which can correctly address the issue of mapping information about what people want (a search query) to actual websites where they will find it. I believe people are already working on this. Ian. On 15 Jun 2006, at 05:02, David McNab wrote: > Hi > > I've been thinking about ways to get human-friendly, yet secure, URIs > under freenet. > > (KSKs are nice, just a shame they're so easily subverted). > > My thoughts so far are: > > 1) Users would trust one or more 'namesites'. For instance, if I have > confidence in Alice's 'namesite', I would stick in my ~/.freenames > file > an entry: > > alice freenet:USK at alicepubkey/alice/0 > > 2) If I want to browse a freesite, with the human-friendly URL of > http://falun-gong.free, my client would look in ~/.freenames, see the > entry for 'alice', then try alice's uri for 'falun-gong'. > > 3) If the 'alice' namesite has an entry for 'falun-gong', then the > URI: > > USK at alicepubkey/alice/0/falun-gong > > should return the physical URI of the 'falun-gong' site I'm looking > for, > which might be: > > USK at falungpubkey/falun-gong/0 > > 4) Alice might trust other namesites, so her namesite would have > a file 'USK at alicepubkey/alice/0/.forward > > which lists URIs for other namesites which Alice considers > trustworthy. > So if Alice didn't have an entry for 'falun-gong', maybe one of the > namesites listed in her .forward file might. > > So, how would this get used in practice? > > One way I've thought of is to implement a basic name server for local > use only. This name server would have a very simple socket interface, > supporting commands like 'lookup' (look up a name), 'list' (list the > trusted namesites), 'add' (add a namesite), 'remove' (remove a > namesite). > > Then the last step is to write an http proxy over the top of fproxy > which simply follows the above method to translate human-readable URIs > such as 'http://falun-gong.free' to > 'http://127.0.0.1:8888/USK at falungongpubkey/falun-gong/0/index.html' > > As for the service side, running a namesite would be very easy. It > would > just be a freesite where the mapping from (say) foo.free is > implemented > as a relative path /foo, which contains just the real freenet URI > 'USK at blahblah/foo/0'. > > An alternative, which would reduce the number of files on the > freesite, > would be to list everything in one file, maybe '/.bulk'. > > But before I launch into something like this, the question to ask is > whether others might see value in having human-readable yet secure and > (relatively) trustworthy URIs. > > For me, I would see value, because I'm getting a bit tired of the > current URIs being so long that I can't see the file extension in my > browser address or status bars. > > Anyway, your thoughts? > > -- > Kind regards > David > > _______________________________________________ > chat mailing list > chat at freenetproject.org > Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/ > listinfo/chat > Or mailto:chat-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > From batosai at batosai.net Thu Jun 15 18:05:11 2006 From: batosai at batosai.net (Julien Cornuwel) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:05:11 +0200 Subject: [freenet-chat] ideas for a freenet 'name server' framework In-Reply-To: <44914C61.5040802@rebirthing.co.nz> References: <44914C61.5040802@rebirthing.co.nz> Message-ID: <4491A157.10300@batosai.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David McNab a ?crit : > Hi > > I've been thinking about ways to get human-friendly, yet secure, URIs > under freenet. > > (KSKs are nice, just a shame they're so easily subverted). > > My thoughts so far are: > > 1) Users would trust one or more 'namesites'. For instance, if I have > confidence in Alice's 'namesite', I would stick in my ~/.freenames file > an entry: > > alice freenet:USK at alicepubkey/alice/0 > > 2) If I want to browse a freesite, with the human-friendly URL of > http://falun-gong.free, my client would look in ~/.freenames, see the > entry for 'alice', then try alice's uri for 'falun-gong'. > > 3) If the 'alice' namesite has an entry for 'falun-gong', then the URI: > > USK at alicepubkey/alice/0/falun-gong > > should return the physical URI of the 'falun-gong' site I'm looking for, > which might be: > > USK at falungpubkey/falun-gong/0 > > 4) Alice might trust other namesites, so her namesite would have > a file 'USK at alicepubkey/alice/0/.forward > > which lists URIs for other namesites which Alice considers trustworthy. > So if Alice didn't have an entry for 'falun-gong', maybe one of the > namesites listed in her .forward file might. > > So, how would this get used in practice? > > One way I've thought of is to implement a basic name server for local > use only. This name server would have a very simple socket interface, > supporting commands like 'lookup' (look up a name), 'list' (list the > trusted namesites), 'add' (add a namesite), 'remove' (remove a namesite). > > Then the last step is to write an http proxy over the top of fproxy > which simply follows the above method to translate human-readable URIs > such as 'http://falun-gong.free' to > 'http://127.0.0.1:8888/USK at falungongpubkey/falun-gong/0/index.html' > > As for the service side, running a namesite would be very easy. It would > just be a freesite where the mapping from (say) foo.free is implemented > as a relative path /foo, which contains just the real freenet URI > 'USK at blahblah/foo/0'. > > An alternative, which would reduce the number of files on the freesite, > would be to list everything in one file, maybe '/.bulk'. > > But before I launch into something like this, the question to ask is > whether others might see value in having human-readable yet secure and > (relatively) trustworthy URIs. > > For me, I would see value, because I'm getting a bit tired of the > current URIs being so long that I can't see the file extension in my > browser address or status bars. > > Anyway, your thoughts? > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEkaFU2VeXaa5y9IARAvObAKDHQg8+dLrzoHLszY1vdp3XCh7a1wCeLHyH 7nu7dBQ6wVklWMG/kYMOVIc= =hAD8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From david at rebirthing.co.nz Fri Jun 16 00:52:39 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:52:39 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] ANN: pyfcp 0.2 released Message-ID: <449200D7.2070003@rebirthing.co.nz> Hi, Announcing a major milestone release of version 0.2 of pyfcp (aka pyFreenet). What is pyfcp? - A suite of client applications for freenet, including a freesite management tool 'freesitemgr', as well as several simple command line tools for freenet. - a python library module for freenet 0.7+ access - an XML-RPC server for freenet access With this release: - freesitemgr now has several levels of compensation for node failures such as node 'forgetting' jobs from its global queue - several minor and major freesitemgr bugs now fixed - freesitemgr seems to be working on windows now - freesitemgr is now 'crontab-ready' Bugs? UFTBT - https://bugs.freenetproject.org/bug_report_page.php, and don't forget to switch to 'pyFreenet' in the top right combobox. Downloads: - svn: project pyFreenet - freenet: USK at T4gW1EvwSrR9AOlBT2hFnWy5wK0rtd5rGhf6bp75tVo,E9uFCy0NhiTbR0jVQkY77doaWtxTrkS9kuMrzOtNzSQ,AQABAAE/pyfcp/0 - web: http://www.freenet.org.nz/pyfcp Enjoy! Cheers David From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Fri Jun 16 12:49:58 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:49:58 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] ANN: pyfcp 0.2 released In-Reply-To: <449200D7.2070003@rebirthing.co.nz> References: <449200D7.2070003@rebirthing.co.nz> Message-ID: <20060616124958.GA3586@amphibian.dyndns.org> I hope that this can be phased out as the underlying bugs are fixed. :) Have you filed bugs for each of the error modes which you have observed? On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 12:52:39PM +1200, David McNab wrote: > > With this release: > > - freesitemgr now has several levels of compensation for node failures > such as node 'forgetting' jobs from its global queue > > - several minor and major freesitemgr bugs now fixed > > - freesitemgr seems to be working on windows now > > - freesitemgr is now 'crontab-ready' > > Bugs? UFTBT - https://bugs.freenetproject.org/bug_report_page.php, and > don't forget to switch to 'pyFreenet' in the top right combobox. > > Downloads: > - svn: project pyFreenet > - freenet: > USK at T4gW1EvwSrR9AOlBT2hFnWy5wK0rtd5rGhf6bp75tVo,E9uFCy0NhiTbR0jVQkY77doaWtxTrkS9kuMrzOtNzSQ,AQABAAE/pyfcp/0 > - web: http://www.freenet.org.nz/pyfcp > > Enjoy! > > > Cheers > David > > _______________________________________________ > chat mailing list > chat at freenetproject.org > Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat > Or mailto:chat-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060616/74de6c30/attachment.pgp From david at rebirthing.co.nz Sat Jun 17 12:06:56 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 00:06:56 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] ANN: pyfcp 0.2.2, with 'name services' Message-ID: <4493F060.8000602@rebirthing.co.nz> Hi, Announcing a new minor release of pyfcp, version 0.2.2 With this release, I've added a 'name services layer', which works as a proof of concept for shareable lists of bookmarks. With pyfcp 'name services', you can set up local 'name services', and add to these services a set of records mapping human-readable names to URIs. For example, I have an entry called 'darknet', which maps to the 'Darknet Index' freesite. If I do 'fcpget darknet', I get the default page. If I do 'fcpget darknet/docs.html', I get the Darknet 'Documents' page. This 'name services' idea can also be thought of as a system of sharable bookmark lists. Once you've created a local 'name service', you can export it with the 'fcpnames listservices' command, so others can import it with the 'fcpnames addpeer' command. Then, others will be able to do lookups, and where their local name services fail, the lookup will try your in-freenet name service. A 'namesite' is a set of freenet USK keys, with a shared SSK public part. For example, if name service 'foo' has the public URI 'USK at yadayada', and contains records 'cat -> KSK at meow', and 'dog -> KSK at woof', then there will be two keys in freenet: - USK at yadayada/cat/0 (containing the string KSK at meow), and - USK at yadayada/dog/0 (containing the string KSK at woof) This framework is so simple it should be easy to implement in other languages (and hopefully even finally end up in node code). More is explained in the manpage for the 'fcpnames' command-line program within the release distribution. Downloads: - svn: project pyFreenet - freenet: USK at T4gW1EvwSrR9AOlBT2hFnWy5wK0rtd5rGhf6bp75tVo,E9uFCy0NhiTbR0jVQkY77doaWtxTrkS9kuMrzOtNzSQ,AQABAAE/pyfcp/0 - web: http://www.freenet.org.nz/pyfcp Enjoy! Cheers David From david at rebirthing.co.nz Sat Jun 17 23:50:46 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 11:50:46 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] #freenet needs more ops Message-ID: <44949556.7020405@rebirthing.co.nz> Hi, There's been a few unmitigated tards cruising #freenet and trolling with various stupidities. For many hours in the day, there are no active ops, and no way to kb said tards. Could the existing ops, nextgens, toad, sanity et al please appoint a couple of more ops, who can have a presence when the existing ops are away? Preferably some people residing between +8 and -6 timezones? -- Kind regards David From david at rebirthing.co.nz Sun Jun 18 23:58:25 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:58:25 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] USK question(s) and weirdness Message-ID: <4495E8A1.9050105@rebirthing.co.nz> Hi, When I insert a site with uri USK at priv-yadayada/name/0, the URI that comes back with the PutSuccessful is USK at pub-yadayada/name/n, where n is the latest rev number. But on inserting with uri USK at priv-yadayada/name/49, the URI that came back was USK at pub-yadayada/name/49, and a fetch to USK at pub-yadayada/name/49 is the one I've just inserted. Does this mean that any given USK edition (or the latest edition) can be 'overwritten'? Also, does it mean that edition 0 is a 'magic number', which on insert, means 'insert to the next available edition', and on retrieve, means 'fetch the latest available edition'? The USK wiki page at http://wiki.freenetproject.org/FreenetUSKPages is in need of explanatory updates. If someone can post some clarifying comments in reply to this post, I'd be willing to update the wiki. -- Kind regards David From bob_j_hayes at yahoo.co.uk Mon Jun 19 00:19:13 2006 From: bob_j_hayes at yahoo.co.uk (Bob) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 01:19:13 +0100 (BST) Subject: [freenet-chat] IWF "Cleanfeed" ISP-level censoring legitimate sites from UK users Message-ID: <20060619001913.40049.qmail@web25508.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> You may have heard of the UK's "Internet Watch Foundation", a jolly UK ISP industry group that operates "Cleanfeed". This is a UK internet censorship system that blocks arbitrary sites at ISP level by returning fake errors (404 etc), much like China's great firewall. Their blocking database is secret; it's unobtainable unless you're an ISP and pay to subscribe to them, which requires signing a legally binding NDA. Major UK ISPs such as BT and NTL use Cleanfeed. As a private industry group they are essentially unaccountable. They claim that their database is for blocking "child abuse websites" only : http://www.iwf.org.uk/media/news.archive-2004.39.htm However, it appears they have now blocked 4chan.org's "/b/ - Random" imageboard : http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html It must be admitted that /b/ is psuedononymous, anarchic and populated mostly by stupid memes, trolling and deliberately tasteless / offensive content. In many ways /b/ is a giant deliberately stupid in-joke not meant to be taken seriously, aside from an occassional thread where people use /b/'s anonymity to ask questions about private matters they feel they cannot discuss elsewhere. In any case, /b/ is most definetely a legitimate and legal forum which has been running for years, is moderated, and is in full compliance with United States law since that's where it's hosted. (4chan itself is essentially a western clone of the Japanese 2ch.net / 2chan.net, amongst the most popular sites in Japan. 4chan is therefore very well known by anime fans etc.) It seems that the IWF have blocked /b/ on the basis that it is a child porn site. This is clearly not the case. Yes, *very occasionally* some moron posts CP on /b/ ... which typically lasts about 30 seconds before it's deleted and they're permabanned. 4chan is no different from any other public forum which allows image posting in this regard, it does not condone such activity and obviously if there was any evidence that it did the US authorities would shut it down instantly. At present the blocking, which is being done by URL, is not very well implemented and there are ways around it. Furthermore not all UK ISPs use Cleanfeed ... yet. However, I hope you will agree that it is very worrying that legitimate internet forums appear to be being censored in the UK secretly and pretty much unaccountably *right now*. I have to wonder how long it will be before our authoritarian government decides we should "standardise" on this "industry best-practice" for its own ends. Further references : http://dis.4chan.org/read.php/newpol/1150560346/1-40 http://dis.4chan.org/read.php/img/1149953763/1-40 http://www.4chan.org/banned.php <-- some BT users redirected here I suppose all this at least serves as inspiration to continue work on freenet :( Bob ___________________________________________________________ Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" ? The Wall Street Journal http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html From sitharus at sitharus.com Mon Jun 19 02:34:58 2006 From: sitharus at sitharus.com (Phillip Hutchings) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:34:58 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] rubyFreenet 0.1 released Message-ID: I think rubyFreenet is at the stage where I can call it 0.1. There are probably bugs and issues all around, but it works for me. It includes a few simple sample applications: - indexr - a basic spider that outputs an HTML page. - rsite - A basic site management system, it's very flaky. - rqueue - A queue management system with DRb and HTTP interfaces You can download it from: - http://www.sitharus.com/~sitharus/rubyFreenet.tar.gz - freenet:USK at kuwfQh0nlu4VKKdOWQCPP2OWmzL-~N3TUOlJyj3HdLw,KClve2yWvUfu-IecJaxQ~ndQRLGNQ6ozYamneJiFBkE,AQABAAE/rubyFreenet/13 -- Phillip Hutchings http://www.sitharus.com/ From david at rebirthing.co.nz Mon Jun 19 04:01:44 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:01:44 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] new freesite - Freenet Name Services Message-ID: <449621A8.3050504@rebirthing.co.nz> Hi all, I've just put up a freesite which explains all about this 'Freenet Name Services' thing I've been working away at: USK at UcQ6qyPb1KVPJ5fD7IwZRfWGl0sf3vgbzTOXI-T7E34,MFb8ziujO5sB~FoKJ-HeJPOuJy0b47jLYdPM~NtvgRU,AQABAAE/nameservice/1/ Site includes introduction, tutorial/walkthrough and theory. -- Kind regards David From david at rebirthing.co.nz Mon Jun 19 06:26:32 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 18:26:32 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] save freenet - stop using frost Message-ID: <44964398.8030807@rebirthing.co.nz> Hi all, I know I'm not alone in feeling frustrated at seeing most of my peer nodes backed off most of the time. I blame frost, especially with the high priority frost tends to use, and its relentless KSK-thrashing. One or both of two things needs to happen: 1) frost drops its priority to 5 or 6 2) people stop using frost Freenet is not ready for a messaging system such as frost, and won't be till 0.8 and the new publish/subscribe features. In the meantime, anonymous messaging IMHO is better done via I2P or Tor. Your thoughts? Cheers David From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Tue Jun 20 13:29:08 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 14:29:08 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] USK question(s) and weirdness In-Reply-To: <4495E8A1.9050105@rebirthing.co.nz> References: <4495E8A1.9050105@rebirthing.co.nz> Message-ID: <20060620132908.GA29956@amphibian.dyndns.org> On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 11:58:25AM +1200, David McNab wrote: > Hi, > > When I insert a site with uri USK at priv-yadayada/name/0, the URI that > comes back with the PutSuccessful is USK at pub-yadayada/name/n, where n is > the latest rev number. > > But on inserting with uri USK at priv-yadayada/name/49, the URI that came > back was USK at pub-yadayada/name/49, and a fetch to > USK at pub-yadayada/name/49 is the one I've just inserted. > > Does this mean that any given USK edition (or the latest edition) can be > 'overwritten'? Also, does it mean that edition 0 is a 'magic number', > which on insert, means 'insert to the next available edition', and on > retrieve, means 'fetch the latest available edition'? No. Well only if the content is identical. Was it? If existing content is being overwritten then there is a bug. > > The USK wiki page at http://wiki.freenetproject.org/FreenetUSKPages is > in need of explanatory updates. > > If someone can post some clarifying comments in reply to this post, I'd > be willing to update the wiki. -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060620/b4369ff7/attachment.pgp From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Tue Jun 20 13:32:23 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 14:32:23 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] IWF "Cleanfeed" ISP-level censoring legitimate sites from UK users In-Reply-To: <20060619001913.40049.qmail@web25508.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20060619001913.40049.qmail@web25508.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060620133223.GB29956@amphibian.dyndns.org> Wait till they start getting court orders from the Church of Scientology! You can block this illegal content; you block this other illegal content, therefore you must block all illegal content and in particular you must block copyright infringing, libellous, state secret (look at the d-notices site that had to move outside the UK), and so on sites. Slippery slope: the road to hell is paved with good (and uninformed) intentions. On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 01:19:13AM +0100, Bob wrote: > You may have heard of the UK's "Internet Watch Foundation", a jolly UK > ISP industry group that operates "Cleanfeed". This is a UK internet > censorship system that blocks arbitrary sites at ISP level by returning > fake errors (404 etc), much like China's great firewall. Their blocking > database is secret; it's unobtainable unless you're an ISP and pay to > subscribe to them, which requires signing a legally binding NDA. Major > UK ISPs such as BT and NTL use Cleanfeed. As a private industry group > they are essentially unaccountable. > > They claim that their database is for blocking "child abuse websites" > only : > http://www.iwf.org.uk/media/news.archive-2004.39.htm > > However, it appears they have now blocked 4chan.org's "/b/ - Random" > imageboard : > http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html > It must be admitted that /b/ is psuedononymous, anarchic and populated > mostly by stupid memes, trolling and deliberately tasteless / offensive > content. In many ways /b/ is a giant deliberately stupid in-joke not > meant to be taken seriously, aside from an occassional thread where > people use /b/'s anonymity to ask questions about private matters they > feel they cannot discuss elsewhere. > > In any case, /b/ is most definetely a legitimate and legal forum which > has been running for years, is moderated, and is in full compliance > with United States law since that's where it's hosted. > (4chan itself is essentially a western clone of the Japanese 2ch.net / > 2chan.net, amongst the most popular sites in Japan. 4chan is therefore > very well known by anime fans etc.) > > It seems that the IWF have blocked /b/ on the basis that it is a child > porn site. This is clearly not the case. Yes, *very occasionally* some > moron posts CP on /b/ ... which typically lasts about 30 seconds > before it's deleted and they're permabanned. 4chan is no different from > any other public forum which allows image posting in this regard, it > does not condone such activity and obviously if there was any evidence > that it did the US authorities would shut it down instantly. > > At present the blocking, which is being done by URL, is not very well > implemented and there are ways around it. Furthermore not all UK ISPs > use Cleanfeed ... yet. However, I hope you will agree that it is very > worrying that legitimate internet forums appear to be being censored in > the UK secretly and pretty much unaccountably *right now*. I have to > wonder how long it will be before our authoritarian government decides > we should "standardise" on this "industry best-practice" for its own > ends. > > Further references : > http://dis.4chan.org/read.php/newpol/1150560346/1-40 > http://dis.4chan.org/read.php/img/1149953763/1-40 > http://www.4chan.org/banned.php <-- some BT users redirected here > > I suppose all this at least serves as inspiration to continue work on > freenet :( > > Bob > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" ? The Wall Street Journal > http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html > _______________________________________________ > chat mailing list > chat at freenetproject.org > Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat > Or mailto:chat-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060620/dbc506d4/attachment.pgp From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Tue Jun 20 13:35:20 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 14:35:20 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] save freenet - stop using frost In-Reply-To: <44964398.8030807@rebirthing.co.nz> References: <44964398.8030807@rebirthing.co.nz> Message-ID: <20060620133520.GC29956@amphibian.dyndns.org> I very much doubt that Frost is the cause of the problems which we see on Freenet. It cannot in any case be stopped, but it only polls small KSKs, and it only does that every 45 minutes or so. Incidentally it does not directly slow down downloads; KSKs/SSKs are treated separately from CHKs. We cannot prohibit Frost; people will use it whether we want them to or not. Freenet needs to be able to deal with it, but personally I see no evidence that Frost is responsible for Freenet's problems. Feel free to find some. On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 06:26:32PM +1200, David McNab wrote: > > Hi all, > > I know I'm not alone in feeling frustrated at seeing most of my peer > nodes backed off most of the time. > > I blame frost, especially with the high priority frost tends to use, and > its relentless KSK-thrashing. > > One or both of two things needs to happen: > > 1) frost drops its priority to 5 or 6 > > 2) people stop using frost > > Freenet is not ready for a messaging system such as frost, and won't be > till 0.8 and the new publish/subscribe features. In the meantime, > anonymous messaging IMHO is better done via I2P or Tor. > > Your thoughts? > > Cheers > David > > _______________________________________________ > chat mailing list > chat at freenetproject.org > Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat > Or mailto:chat-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060620/aec2e13d/attachment.pgp From david at rebirthing.co.nz Tue Jun 20 22:41:34 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:41:34 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] USK question(s) and weirdness In-Reply-To: <20060620132908.GA29956@amphibian.dyndns.org> References: <4495E8A1.9050105@rebirthing.co.nz> <20060620132908.GA29956@amphibian.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <4498799E.9090108@rebirthing.co.nz> Matthew Toseland wrote: > No. Well only if the content is identical. Was it? If existing content > is being overwritten then there is a bug. Existing content is definitely being overwritten, and the new version read back with the same USK edition number. -- Kind regards David From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Tue Jun 20 23:00:42 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 00:00:42 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] USK question(s) and weirdness In-Reply-To: <4498799E.9090108@rebirthing.co.nz> References: <4495E8A1.9050105@rebirthing.co.nz> <20060620132908.GA29956@amphibian.dyndns.org> <4498799E.9090108@rebirthing.co.nz> Message-ID: <20060620230042.GA14209@amphibian.dyndns.org> On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 10:41:34AM +1200, David McNab wrote: > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > No. Well only if the content is identical. Was it? If existing content > > is being overwritten then there is a bug. > > Existing content is definitely being overwritten, and the new version > read back with the same USK edition number. You're sure about that? What if you insert it as the corresponding SSK? -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060621/82cf0ab5/attachment.pgp From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Tue Jun 20 23:06:49 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 00:06:49 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] Scientology strikes again Message-ID: <20060620230648.GA31038@amphibian.dyndns.org> http://codebot.org/notice.html Thanks to ian for finding this. -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060621/df3fb05e/attachment.pgp From david at rebirthing.co.nz Tue Jun 20 23:07:33 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:07:33 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] noderef irc bot Message-ID: <44987FB5.5060504@rebirthing.co.nz> Hi, The latest pyfcp (pyFreenet) now has a small experimental program called 'refbot.py'. If you run it without arguments, it'll create an IRC bot which: - logs into irc.freenode.net #freenet-refs - announces itself - interacts with users who /msg or /privmsg it - accepts noderefs from users, and reciprocates with its own ref - detects other bots joining the channel, and automatically swaps noderefs with them - is hard-wired to quit after swapping 10 noderefs (we're not keen on ubernodes). First time you run it, it'll prompt you with a few questions, then save to ~/.freenet_ref_bot. Subsequent runs will just use this file and skip the prompts. Much easier than all that menial copying/pasting of refs between irc client and browser Have fun. Cheers David From david at rebirthing.co.nz Tue Jun 20 23:36:29 2006 From: david at rebirthing.co.nz (David McNab) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:36:29 +1200 Subject: [freenet-chat] Scientology strikes again In-Reply-To: <20060620230648.GA31038@amphibian.dyndns.org> References: <20060620230648.GA31038@amphibian.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <4498867D.4010006@rebirthing.co.nz> Matthew Toseland wrote: > http://codebot.org/notice.html > > Thanks to ian for finding this. Time for an updated scientology freesite in 0.7, including the 'South Park' episode "Trapped In The Closet". Let the thetan-bots try to take *that* down! -- Kind regards David From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Wed Jun 21 00:38:55 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 01:38:55 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] Scientology strikes again In-Reply-To: <4498867D.4010006@rebirthing.co.nz> References: <20060620230648.GA31038@amphibian.dyndns.org> <4498867D.4010006@rebirthing.co.nz> Message-ID: <20060621003855.GA22165@amphibian.dyndns.org> On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 11:36:29AM +1200, David McNab wrote: > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > http://codebot.org/notice.html > > > > Thanks to ian for finding this. > > Time for an updated scientology freesite in 0.7, including the 'South > Park' episode "Trapped In The Closet". I wonder if that comes under fair use...? > > Let the thetan-bots try to take *that* down! :) -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060621/e4ed9366/attachment.pgp From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Wed Jun 21 16:25:51 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 17:25:51 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] New mailing list: darknet-tools Message-ID: <20060621162550.GA6359@amphibian.dyndns.org> We have created a new mailing list, the darknet-tools list. This is for discussion of tools for reference exchange. Primarily by this I mean: - Plugins for IRC clients, IM clients, etc to make it easy to exchange node references - generally with people you already know. - Functionality needed by the node to support such plugins. - Standards for such plugins (e.g. there may be 10 different IRC plugins). - Anything else related to expanding the darknet. I have two volunteers to write IRC plugins. What would be really nice would be some plugins for instant messaging systems, as these are a close match to what we are trying to do; AIM, GAIM, etc, have plugin APIs, we just need people to write them. Anyone interested in getting involved - you don't have to know java! - subscribe to the list and explain your interest. People who have prior experience of writing plugins for these things are especially welcome, but if you are interested in the topic then please subscribe to darknet-tools. http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/darknet-tools/ -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060621/043c1626/attachment.pgp From bob_j_hayes at yahoo.co.uk Fri Jun 23 15:05:31 2006 From: bob_j_hayes at yahoo.co.uk (Bob) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 16:05:31 +0100 (BST) Subject: [freenet-chat] IWF "Cleanfeed" ISP-level censoring legitimate sites from UK users In-Reply-To: <20060620133223.GB29956@amphibian.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20060623150531.49207.qmail@web25506.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> --- Matthew Toseland wrote: > Wait till they start getting court orders from the Church of > Scientology! You can block this illegal content; you block this other > illegal content, therefore you must block all illegal content and in > particular you must block copyright infringing, libellous, state > secret > (look at the d-notices site that had to move outside the UK), and so > on > sites. Slippery slope: the road to hell is paved with good (and > uninformed) intentions. Indeed, they don't seem too concerned about retaining their 'common carrier' status for some reason do they? Although the IWF is nominally an industry group, its existence and policy appear to be very much driven by the Home Office - i.e. "filter yourselves or we'll legislate it." Consider the implications of this Commons answer from last Monday (19th June 2006) : http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060619/debtext/60619-0540.htm#column_1052 "I have recently set the UK internet industry a target to ensure that by the end of 2007, all internet service providers offering broadband internet connectivity to the UK public prevent their customers from accessing those websites" (...) "We expect 90 per cent. of internet service providers to have blocked access to sites abroad by the end of 2006. The target is that by the end of 2007 that will be 100 per cent. We believe that working with the industry offers us the best way forward, but we will keep that under review if it looks likely that the targets will not be met." In other words, it would appear that secret, known-to-be-fallible and largely unaccountable internet censorship is going to become *compulsory* for all UK 'broadband' access, either psudeo-"voluntarily" or via legislation as formal state internet censorship. In either case the end result is much the same of course, and the potential for slippery-slope extension very real, particularly given this government's poor track record on civil liberties. > On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 01:19:13AM +0100, Bob wrote: > > You may have heard of the UK's "Internet Watch Foundation", a jolly > UK > > ISP industry group that operates "Cleanfeed". This is a UK internet > > censorship system that blocks arbitrary sites at ISP level by > returning > > fake errors (404 etc), much like China's great firewall. Their > blocking > > database is secret; it's unobtainable unless you're an ISP and pay > to > > subscribe to them, which requires signing a legally binding NDA. > Major > > UK ISPs such as BT and NTL use Cleanfeed. As a private industry > group > > they are essentially unaccountable. > > > > They claim that their database is for blocking "child abuse > websites" > > only : > > http://www.iwf.org.uk/media/news.archive-2004.39.htm > > > > However, it appears they have now blocked 4chan.org's "/b/ - > Random" > > imageboard : > > http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html > > It must be admitted that /b/ is psuedononymous, anarchic and > populated > > mostly by stupid memes, trolling and deliberately tasteless / > offensive > > content. In many ways /b/ is a giant deliberately stupid in-joke > not > > meant to be taken seriously, aside from an occassional thread where > > people use /b/'s anonymity to ask questions about private matters > they > > feel they cannot discuss elsewhere. > > > > In any case, /b/ is most definetely a legitimate and legal forum > which > > has been running for years, is moderated, and is in full compliance > > with United States law since that's where it's hosted. > > (4chan itself is essentially a western clone of the Japanese > 2ch.net / > > 2chan.net, amongst the most popular sites in Japan. 4chan is > therefore > > very well known by anime fans etc.) > > > > It seems that the IWF have blocked /b/ on the basis that it is a > child > > porn site. This is clearly not the case. Yes, *very occasionally* > some > > moron posts CP on /b/ ... which typically lasts about 30 seconds > > before it's deleted and they're permabanned. 4chan is no different > from > > any other public forum which allows image posting in this regard, > it > > does not condone such activity and obviously if there was any > evidence > > that it did the US authorities would shut it down instantly. > > > > At present the blocking, which is being done by URL, is not very > well > > implemented and there are ways around it. Furthermore not all UK > ISPs > > use Cleanfeed ... yet. However, I hope you will agree that it is > very > > worrying that legitimate internet forums appear to be being > censored in > > the UK secretly and pretty much unaccountably *right now*. I have > to > > wonder how long it will be before our authoritarian government > decides > > we should "standardise" on this "industry best-practice" for its > own > > ends. > > > > Further references : > > http://dis.4chan.org/read.php/newpol/1150560346/1-40 > > http://dis.4chan.org/read.php/img/1149953763/1-40 > > http://www.4chan.org/banned.php <-- some BT users redirected here > > > > I suppose all this at least serves as inspiration to continue work > on > > freenet :( > > > > Bob ___________________________________________________________ Copy addresses and emails from any email account to Yahoo! Mail - quick, easy and free. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/trueswitch2.html From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Fri Jun 23 17:41:43 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 18:41:43 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] IWF "Cleanfeed" ISP-level censoring legitimate sites from UK users In-Reply-To: <20060623150531.49207.qmail@web25506.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20060620133223.GB29956@amphibian.dyndns.org> <20060623150531.49207.qmail@web25506.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060623174143.GB4412@amphibian.dyndns.org> Ugh. I'm going to have to write to my MP about that... On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 04:05:31PM +0100, Bob wrote: > --- Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > Wait till they start getting court orders from the Church of > > Scientology! You can block this illegal content; you block this other > > illegal content, therefore you must block all illegal content and in > > particular you must block copyright infringing, libellous, state > > secret > > (look at the d-notices site that had to move outside the UK), and so > > on > > sites. Slippery slope: the road to hell is paved with good (and > > uninformed) intentions. > > Indeed, they don't seem too concerned about retaining their 'common > carrier' status for some reason do they? > > Although the IWF is nominally an industry group, its existence and > policy appear to be very much driven by the Home Office - i.e. "filter > yourselves or we'll legislate it." Consider the implications of this > Commons answer from last Monday (19th June 2006) : > > http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060619/debtext/60619-0540.htm#column_1052 > > "I have recently set the UK internet industry a target to ensure that > by the end of 2007, all internet service providers offering broadband > internet connectivity to the UK public prevent their customers from > accessing those websites" (...) "We expect 90 per cent. of internet > service providers to have blocked access to sites abroad by the end of > 2006. The target is that by the end of 2007 that will be 100 per cent. > We believe that working with the industry offers us the best way > forward, but we will keep that under review if it looks likely that the > targets will not be met." > > In other words, it would appear that secret, known-to-be-fallible and > largely unaccountable internet censorship is going to become > *compulsory* for all UK 'broadband' access, either psudeo-"voluntarily" > or via legislation as formal state internet censorship. In either case > the end result is much the same of course, and the potential for > slippery-slope extension very real, particularly given this > government's poor track record on civil liberties. > > > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 01:19:13AM +0100, Bob wrote: > > > You may have heard of the UK's "Internet Watch Foundation", a jolly > > UK > > > ISP industry group that operates "Cleanfeed". This is a UK internet > > > censorship system that blocks arbitrary sites at ISP level by > > returning > > > fake errors (404 etc), much like China's great firewall. Their > > blocking > > > database is secret; it's unobtainable unless you're an ISP and pay > > to > > > subscribe to them, which requires signing a legally binding NDA. > > Major > > > UK ISPs such as BT and NTL use Cleanfeed. As a private industry > > group > > > they are essentially unaccountable. > > > > > > They claim that their database is for blocking "child abuse > > websites" > > > only : > > > http://www.iwf.org.uk/media/news.archive-2004.39.htm > > > > > > However, it appears they have now blocked 4chan.org's "/b/ - > > Random" > > > imageboard : > > > http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html > > > It must be admitted that /b/ is psuedononymous, anarchic and > > populated > > > mostly by stupid memes, trolling and deliberately tasteless / > > offensive > > > content. In many ways /b/ is a giant deliberately stupid in-joke > > not > > > meant to be taken seriously, aside from an occassional thread where > > > people use /b/'s anonymity to ask questions about private matters > > they > > > feel they cannot discuss elsewhere. > > > > > > In any case, /b/ is most definetely a legitimate and legal forum > > which > > > has been running for years, is moderated, and is in full compliance > > > with United States law since that's where it's hosted. > > > (4chan itself is essentially a western clone of the Japanese > > 2ch.net / > > > 2chan.net, amongst the most popular sites in Japan. 4chan is > > therefore > > > very well known by anime fans etc.) > > > > > > It seems that the IWF have blocked /b/ on the basis that it is a > > child > > > porn site. This is clearly not the case. Yes, *very occasionally* > > some > > > moron posts CP on /b/ ... which typically lasts about 30 seconds > > > before it's deleted and they're permabanned. 4chan is no different > > from > > > any other public forum which allows image posting in this regard, > > it > > > does not condone such activity and obviously if there was any > > evidence > > > that it did the US authorities would shut it down instantly. > > > > > > At present the blocking, which is being done by URL, is not very > > well > > > implemented and there are ways around it. Furthermore not all UK > > ISPs > > > use Cleanfeed ... yet. However, I hope you will agree that it is > > very > > > worrying that legitimate internet forums appear to be being > > censored in > > > the UK secretly and pretty much unaccountably *right now*. I have > > to > > > wonder how long it will be before our authoritarian government > > decides > > > we should "standardise" on this "industry best-practice" for its > > own > > > ends. > > > > > > Further references : > > > http://dis.4chan.org/read.php/newpol/1150560346/1-40 > > > http://dis.4chan.org/read.php/img/1149953763/1-40 > > > http://www.4chan.org/banned.php <-- some BT users redirected here > > > > > > I suppose all this at least serves as inspiration to continue work > > on > > > freenet :( > > > > > > Bob > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > Copy addresses and emails from any email account to Yahoo! Mail - quick, easy and free. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/trueswitch2.html > -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060623/f3a504bf/attachment.pgp From Colin at sq7.org Sat Jun 24 14:22:31 2006 From: Colin at sq7.org (Colin Davis) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 10:22:31 -0400 Subject: [freenet-chat] Arguments against the Darknet Message-ID: <6E346768-CB71-4AAE-94EA-422C2F5AE3E1@sq7.org> I'd like to use this opportunity to disagree with the current .7 strategy of the darknet- I've done it before, but this is the Chat list, so It's not Off-topic to have a discussion about it. I'd like to start of by admitting that I probably know the least about the subject, compared with anyone else in the room. This isn't a pissing match, I just want freenet to be the best it can be. We all do. That's why we're here. The darknet model should be supplemented with an opennet SOON- I personally know 4 friends of mine who I have spoken with in person, who have not wanted to use freenet in it's current state. I'll attempt to discuss some concerns below. I've tried to intend my thoughts below, for ease of reading. The first is the idea of trust in Freenet .7 is complete- You argue that you should only join with your real life friends, That your peers are people that you trust, but this breaks down for a few reasons. 1) The first is that it doesn't fit the Social networking model that we're looking to model after. In Milgrim's experiments (which, btw, were seldom as successful as his first attempt), he found that the best results came from the occasional long distance link. a) In real life we often have these- For example, I am < 4 steps from Bill Gates- My Pastor knows a friend of a friend, etc. The problem is, these long distance links, such as My Pastor, aren't necessarily people I trust on a deep level. b) These weak links are often Largely grouped- Again, My Pastor- There are several hundred people in his congregation. If each of these people linked to him, we'd get ubernodes, which you disagree with (See my other e-mail). 2) Trust isn't universal a) The freenet .7 model gives them complete trust- I trust my flatmate not to download CP, but I don't trust him not to download an illegial MP3 file. Do I link with him? Do I need to find people with whom I agree about everything? b) People are desperate- Think about our chinese dissident- He wants to learn more about the Western world, and to write and publish about democracy. So he links with other people who are writing about democracy.. He wants the information. But he knows that a number of them are otherwise untrustworthy people. Even though they all share a love of democracy, should they link to one another? 3) We may never get to the point that freenet is "Big enough" a) Sanity has argued on a Gmail model, where freenet is the "in- thing", and people are looking for ways to get into it. I) The number of people who want a truely anonymous network are far fewer than the people who want a GB of free e-mail. II) And even if we DID get that level of success, those links weren't traded to people that were trusted. there were automted gmail invite traders Gmail invites were sold on eBay, etc. It's not the best model for emulation. b) People go to the path of least resistance- I) It's always going to be easier to go to #freenet-refs, than it is going to be to find friends who use the service. Promiscuous linking is just easier! II) More people care about speed than absolute privacy- Look at how popular BitTorrent is. * The best model will allow top speed for people who don't care as much, but more privacy for people who do * The right way to bring this about is be KEEPING THE DARKNET, but layering an openet on top of it. * People who care a lot about privacy use the darknet- People who are desperate or want speed, use the OpenNet. 4) People are afraid of the Darknet a) People are afraid of manually choosing to link- I) For the reasons we outlined earlier, people don't know 100% that their friends can be trusted in every domain II) Because of that, they are afraid to link with people. they don't want to be associated with a "Bad Guy" * Rightfully or wrongly, they are worried (I've had actual potential users say this), that they will link with a person who, unknowingly to them when they linked to him, does Bad Things. * Freenet has always had a bit of a public scare because of CP concerns. I'm not going to debate that here. But people don't want to SPECIFICALLY, and KNOWINGLY ---- CHOOSE--- to link with a person who might do CP. b) We need money! I) We need users to get donations. II) Users are afraid of the darknet III) It's worth spending developer time on things that will improve the number of people in the network, and number of people donating, c) Implementing Opennet will help get more users, which helps get more donations. I'll be happy to discuss this with anyone who's interested. It's a serious issue, and I'm trying to go about things the Right way. From Colin at sq7.org Sat Jun 24 14:34:41 2006 From: Colin at sq7.org (Colin Davis) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 10:34:41 -0400 Subject: [freenet-chat] Arguments against not utilizing Ubernodes Message-ID: <693F5CB7-7F92-4BC0-A8CA-7D84CCF45D48@sq7.org> I'd like to use this opportunity to disagree with the current .7 strategy of not utilzing large nodes- I've done it before, but this is the Chat list, so It's not Off-topic to have a discussion about it. As per my other e-mail, I'd like to start of by admitting that I probably know the least about the subject, compared with anyone else in the room. This isn't a pissing match, I just want freenet to be the best it can be. We all do. That's why we're here. I've tried to intend my thoughts below, for ease of reading. I've talked with Ian, Nextgens, Toad, aphophis, SinnerG, and anyone else who was interested about the role of Ubernodes- I admit I don't understand things as well as others, but I hope that other people who agree with me might join this discussion. 1) Users tend to prefer Speed to Anonymity- a) Look at the Success of networks like Bittorrent- All the peers downloading a file are completely exposed, but people enjoy using it because they can get a file quickly. b) While the focus of Freenet is different, we can still let USERS make that tradeoff. I) There are a lot of tweaks that could be made, to make things faster. * Increasing the check for new editions exponentially, for instance * Or fully utilizing ubernodes II) As it is, there are people, such as SinnerG, Apophis, and myself, who are BEGGING to make freenet faster! 2) Freenet is about giving the users control. a) The project should give users control whenever possible, assuming it doesn't remove significant security from others I) If a user wants to route their data through a fast server, shouldn't we give them that option? b) Trust levels, as mentioned by Toad on the Devl mailing list are a good start, but there are more trusts that can be done. I) Lets say I trust my friend quite a bit, and set him to a high trust level.. Why not fully utilize his connection to me, if it's otherwise empty? II) If I've set him to a high trust level, I'm presumably OK routing more requests through his node. * As it is, requests are more or less random among non-backed off peers. * If I trust my friend, I'd be OK preferring to send through him c) Implementing a NG-style, stochastic modeling system ensures that users are properly utilizing resources. 3) The current strategy is fighting a symptom, not the problem. a) We can already achieve Ubernode-like results using bands of smaller nodes. I) If I set up 10 mini-nodes, all inner linked, and each connected to 10-15 peers, I could harvest just as much data on net network II) The network would see these as different nodes, and fully utilize them. III ) Multiple IP addresses to run on are cheap ;) b) The problems with Ubernodes are mitigated if the data is stored other places as well. I) If freenet used proper NG-style modeling, it would always draw from the fastest source, which is usually going to be a point between the ubernode, and the direct user. II) Once the user has downloaded it, by default it's in his node anyway. c) Let's find ways of working to utilize freenet nodes fully, and safely, so that when the bad guys come, and start EvilNodes, we're already doing well enough that people don't flock to them. 4) We want more people to use Freenet- This brings more nodes to route, more exposure, and MORE MONEY, which means more dev-time. a) As it is, the network is awash with Backoffs. I) We're not entirely sure how to fix it. II) Some of the solutions proposed seem more like guesses. b) Users are more likely to use a faster net I) People get frustrated with freenet speed. II) It's a lot better than .5, but it's a LOT slower than it should be. III) People join things just for speed- See 1) above. c) The more people who use the network, the more money the network brings in d) We can utilize ubernodes now, and move back later. I) Right now, Ubernodes are one of the best tools for making the network run faster. II) After the network is bigger, we can back off of them. * The network will natually back off from them- The can't keep up with 10000 users, for one. For another, No one node can compete with 10000 smaller nodes. III) Let's take the advantage in the short term, so that we can better build the long term. I'll be happy to discuss this with anyone who's interested. It's a serious issue, and I'm trying to go about things the Right way. From roger at hayter.org Sat Jun 24 16:50:34 2006 From: roger at hayter.org (Roger Hayter) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 17:50:34 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] Arguments against the Darknet In-Reply-To: <6E346768-CB71-4AAE-94EA-422C2F5AE3E1@sq7.org> References: <6E346768-CB71-4AAE-94EA-422C2F5AE3E1@sq7.org> Message-ID: In message <6E346768-CB71-4AAE-94EA-422C2F5AE3E1 at sq7.org>, Colin Davis writes >I'd like to use this opportunity to disagree with the current .7 >strategy of the darknet- I've done it before, but this is the Chat >list, so It's not Off-topic to have a discussion about it. > > >I'd like to start of by admitting that I probably know the least about >the subject, compared with anyone else in the room. This isn't a >pissing match, I just want freenet to be the best it can be. >We all do. That's why we're here. > >The darknet model should be supplemented with an opennet SOON- I >personally know 4 friends of mine who I have spoken with in person, who >have not wanted to use freenet in it's current state. I'll attempt to >discuss some concerns below. > >I've tried to intend my thoughts below, for ease of reading. > > > >The first is the idea of trust in Freenet .7 is complete- You argue >that you should only join with your real life friends, >That your peers are people that you trust, but this breaks down for a >few reasons. > 1) The first is that it doesn't fit the Social networking model >that we're looking to model after. > In Milgrim's experiments (which, btw, were seldom as successful >as his first attempt), he found that the best results came from the > occasional long distance link. > a) In real life we often have these- For >example, I am < 4 steps from Bill Gates- My Pastor knows a friend of a >friend, etc. > The problem is, these long distance >links, such as My Pastor, aren't necessarily people I trust on a deep >level. > b) These weak links are often Largely grouped- >Again, My Pastor- There are several hundred people in his congregation. > If each of these people linked to him, >we'd get ubernodes, which you disagree with (See my other e-mail). > 2) Trust isn't universal > a) The freenet .7 model gives them complete >trust- I trust my flatmate not to download CP, but I don't trust him >not to download an > illegial MP3 file. Do I link with him? >Do I need to find people with whom I agree about everything? > b) People are desperate- Think about our chinese >dissident- He wants to learn more about the Western world, and to >write and publish > about democracy. So he links with other >people who are writing about democracy.. He wants the information. But >he knows that a number of them > are otherwise untrustworthy people. Even >though they all share a love of democracy, should they link to one >another? > 3) We may never get to the point that freenet is "Big enough" > a) Sanity has argued on a Gmail model, where >freenet is the "in- thing", and people are looking for ways to get into >it. > I) The number of people who want a >truely anonymous network are far fewer than the people who want a GB >of free e-mail. > II) And even if we DID get that level of >success, those links weren't traded to people that were trusted. there >were automted gmail invite traders > Gmail invites were sold on eBay, >etc. It's not the best model for emulation. > b) People go to the path of least resistance- > I) It's always going to be easier to go >to #freenet-refs, than it is going to be to find friends who use the >service. Promiscuous linking is just easier! > II) More people care about speed than >absolute privacy- Look at how popular BitTorrent is. > * The best model will >allow top speed for people who don't care as much, but more privacy >for people who do > * The right way to bring >this about is be KEEPING THE DARKNET, but layering an openet on top of >it. > * People who care a lot >about privacy use the darknet- People who are desperate or want speed, >use the OpenNet. > 4) People are afraid of the Darknet > a) People are afraid of manually choosing to link- > I) For the reasons we outlined earlier, >people don't know 100% that their friends can be trusted in every >domain > II) Because of that, they are afraid to >link with people. they don't want to be associated with a "Bad Guy" > * Rightfully or wrongly, >they are worried (I've had actual potential users say this), that they >will link with a person who, > unknowingly to them when they linked to him, does Bad Things. > * Freenet has always had >a bit of a public scare because of CP concerns. I'm not going to >debate that here. > But people don't >want to SPECIFICALLY, and KNOWINGLY ---- CHOOSE--- to link with a >person who might do CP. > b) We need money! > I) We need users to get donations. > II) Users are afraid of the darknet > III) It's worth spending developer time >on things that will improve the number of people in the network, and >number of people donating, > c) Implementing Opennet will help get more >users, which helps get more donations. > >I'll be happy to discuss this with anyone who's interested. It's a >serious issue, and I'm trying to go about things the Right way. FWIW, I agree with all your points. And I would add that no-one is more than 2 steps away from a police spy - I find random connection *adds* plausible deniability: although not (and this is a valid point that has been made by the developers) if running Freenet is itself a crime. But if every friend has at least one friend who is a police spy, they are going to know you are running Freenet anyway. The only defence is to have so many people running Freenet that they don't bother to prosecute unless they already suspect you of something, in which case they will always find something to prosecute you for if they want to anyway. But is not the routing model for Freenet 0.7 dependent on some sort of affinity network rather than the old open/random connection model? -- Roger Hayter From josh at vitriolix.com Sat Jun 24 17:29:28 2006 From: josh at vitriolix.com (Josh Steiner) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 10:29:28 -0700 Subject: [freenet-chat] Scientology strikes again In-Reply-To: <20060620230648.GA31038@amphibian.dyndns.org> References: <20060620230648.GA31038@amphibian.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <449D7678.3000805@vitriolix.com> what was this? it just redirects to http://www.scientology.org/ Matthew Toseland wrote: > http://codebot.org/notice.html > > Thanks to ian for finding this. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > chat mailing list > chat at freenetproject.org > Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat > Or mailto:chat-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe -- ________________________________________________________________ tasty electronic music vittles -- bluevitriol.com the only music blog you need -- playtherecords.com you are the dj. interactive music -- improbableorchestra.com random observations of the bizarre -- vitriolix.com From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Sat Jun 24 17:47:43 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 18:47:43 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] Scientology strikes again In-Reply-To: <449D7678.3000805@vitriolix.com> References: <20060620230648.GA31038@amphibian.dyndns.org> <449D7678.3000805@vitriolix.com> Message-ID: <20060624174743.GB3273@amphibian.dyndns.org> It used to be a takedown notice. Somebody probably has a copy of before (from google) and after saved somewhere. On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 10:29:28AM -0700, Josh Steiner wrote: > what was this? it just redirects to http://www.scientology.org/ > > Matthew Toseland wrote: > >http://codebot.org/notice.html > > > >Thanks to ian for finding this. -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060624/3a915298/attachment.pgp From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Sat Jun 24 19:40:34 2006 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 20:40:34 +0100 Subject: [freenet-chat] Scientology strikes again In-Reply-To: References: <20060620230648.GA31038@amphibian.dyndns.org> <449D7678.3000805@vitriolix.com> Message-ID: <20060624194034.GA3459@amphibian.dyndns.org> On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 11:34:55AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > > On 24 Jun 2006, at 10:29, Josh Steiner wrote: > >what was this? it just redirects to http://www.scientology.org/ > > Taking a website critical of you, and redirecting it to your own > website.... these guys have no sense of shame at their blatant > censorship effort, but I guess believing in intergalactic aliens does > weird things to your sense of right and wrong. I don't think their beliefs have that much to do with it actually. :| I wonder if advocating mirroring xenu.org, or the fishman papers, to freenet is a violation of IPRED2... :) > > Ian. -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060624/ff1c1079/attachment.pgp From lars.j.nielsen at gmail.com Sun Jun 25 07:53:00 2006 From: lars.j.nielsen at gmail.com (Lars Juel Nielsen) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 09:53:00 +0200 Subject: [freenet-chat] IWF "Cleanfeed" ISP-level censoring legitimate sites from UK users In-Reply-To: <20060623174143.GB4412@amphibian.dyndns.org> References: <20060620133223.GB29956@amphibian.dyndns.org> <20060623150531.49207.qmail@web25506.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <20060623174143.GB4412@amphibian.dyndns.org> Message-ID: On 6/23/06, Matthew Toseland wrote: > Ugh. I'm going to have to write to my MP about that... > > On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 04:05:31PM +0100, Bob wrote: > > --- Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > > > Wait till they start getting court orders from the Church of > > > Scientology! You can block this illegal content; you block this other > > > illegal content, therefore you must block all illegal content and in > > > particular you must block copyright infringing, libellous, state > > > secret > > > (look at the d-notices site that had to move outside the UK), and so > > > on > > > sites. Slippery slope: the road to hell is paved with good (and > > > uninformed) intentions. > > > > Indeed, they don't seem too concerned about retaining their 'common > > carrier' status for some reason do they? > > > > Although the IWF is nominally an industry group, its existence and > > policy appear to be very much driven by the Home Office - i.e. "filter > > yourselves or we'll legislate it." Consider the implications of this > > Commons answer from last Monday (19th June 2006) : > > > > http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060619/debtext/60619-0540.htm#column_1052 > > > > "I have recently set the UK internet industry a target to ensure that > > by the end of 2007, all internet service providers offering broadband > > internet connectivity to the UK public prevent their customers from > > accessing those websites" (...) "We expect 90 per cent. of internet > > service providers to have blocked access to sites abroad by the end of > > 2006. The target is that by the end of 2007 that will be 100 per cent. > > We believe that working with the industry offers us the best way > > forward, but we will keep that under review if it looks likely that the > > targets will not be met." > > > > In other words, it would appear that secret, known-to-be-fallible and > > largely unaccountable internet censorship is going to become > > *compulsory* for all UK 'broadband' access, either psudeo-"voluntarily" > > or via legislation as formal state internet censorship. In either case > > the end result is much the same of course, and the potential for > > slippery-slope extension very real, particularly given this > > government's poor track record on civil liberties. > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 01:19:13AM +0100, Bob wrote: > > > > You may have heard of the UK's "Internet Watch Foundation", a jolly > > > UK > > > > ISP industry group that operates "Cleanfeed". This is a UK internet > > > > censorship system that blocks arbitrary sites at ISP level by > > > returning > > > > fake errors (404 etc), much like China's great firewall. Their > > > blocking > > > > database is secret; it's unobtainable unless you're an ISP and pay > > > to > > > > subscribe to them, which requires signing a legally binding NDA. > > > Major > > > > UK ISPs such as BT and NTL use Cleanfeed. As a private industry > > > group > > > > they are essentially unaccountable. > > > > > > > > They claim that their database is for blocking "child abuse > > > websites" > > > > only : > > > > http://www.iwf.org.uk/media/news.archive-2004.39.htm > > > > > > > > However, it appears they have now blocked 4chan.org's "/b/ - > > > Random" > > > > imageboard : > > > > http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html > > > > It must be admitted that /b/ is psuedononymous, anarchic and > > > populated > > > > mostly by stupid memes, trolling and deliberately tasteless / > > > offensive > > > > content. In many ways /b/ is a giant deliberately stupid in-joke > > > not > > > > meant to be taken seriously, aside from an occassional thread where > > > > people use /b/'s anonymity to ask questions about private matters > > > they > > > > feel they cannot discuss elsewhere. > > > > > > > > In any case, /b/ is most definetely a legitimate and legal forum > > > which > > > > has been running for years, is moderated, and is in full compliance > > > > with United States law since that's where it's hosted. > > > > (4chan itself is essentially a western clone of the Japanese > > > 2ch.net / > > > > 2chan.net, amongst the most popular sites in Japan. 4chan is > > > therefore > > > > very well known by anime fans etc.) > > > > > > > > It seems that the IWF have blocked /b/ on the basis that it is a > > > child > > > > porn site. This is clearly not the case. Yes, *very occasionally* > > > some > > > > moron posts CP on /b/ ... which typically lasts about 30 seconds > > > > before it's deleted and they're permabanned. 4chan is no different > > > from > > > > any other public forum which allows image posting in this regard, > > > it > > > > does not condone such activity and obviously if there was any > > > evidence > > > > that it did the US authorities would shut it down instantly. > > > > > > > > At present the blocking, which is being done by URL, is not very > > > well > > > > implemented and there are ways around it. Furthermore not all UK > > > ISPs > > > > use Cleanfeed ... yet. However, I hope you will agree that it is > > > very > > > > worrying that legitimate internet forums appear to be being > > > censored in > > > > the UK secretly and pretty much unaccountably *right now*. I have > > > to > > > > wonder how long it will be before our authoritarian government > > > decides > > > > we should "standardise" on this "industry best-practice" for its > > > own > > > > ends. > > > > > > > > Further references : > > > > http://dis.4chan.org/read.php/newpol/1150560346/1-40 > > > > http://dis.4chan.org/read.php/img/1149953763/1-40 > > > > http://www.4chan.org/banned.php <-- some BT users redirected here > > > > > > > > I suppose all this at least serves as inspiration to continue work > > > on > > > > freenet :( > > > > > > > > Bob > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > > Copy addresses and emails from any email account to Yahoo! Mail - quick, easy and free. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/trueswitch2.html > > > > -- > Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFEnCfWOHFIJVywduQRAnOzAJ94F3wYarGHhr6VnetVAQyGYNv8yQCglP7a > kUF1jdBgpXbreWQSdK34r0g= > =yhdG > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > _______________________________________________ > chat mailing list > chat at freenetproject.org > Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat > Or mailto:chat-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > > We have a similar thing here in Denmark. The police make a list of URLs to block and ISPs can choose to block the links but at least for now it's not mandatory to do so. The funny thing is that recently some site got on the list because it linked to a site which linked to another site which at some point supposedly had CP on it. Of course the media went crazy and the site was removed from the list in about a week but it's sad that it could even happen that it got on there in the first place. I wonder if this goes through... I distinctly remember writing this reply before but it didn't show up on the list or in the sent mail folder on my gmail account... Curious. Bah and now I just sent it to only toad... I should check the addresses when replyint... From Colin at sq7.org Sun Jun 25 22:15:04 2006 From: Colin at sq7.org (Colin Davis) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 18:15:04 -0400 Subject: [freenet-chat] Arguments against the Darknet In-Reply-To: References: <6E346768-CB71-4AAE-94EA-422C2F5AE3E1@sq7.org> Message-ID: <8ABD3C02-A459-4BC5-B46B-06AF78BB350C@sq7.org> > > If/when we do opennet people will use that instead till it gets > blocked(it will happen eventually), then we're back to trying to get > the darknet working for everyone again. If most people will use the > opennet till it's impossible to do anymore there will be very few and > probably small seperate darknets, a lot of data will be lost and time > will need to be spent building up the net again as a darknet. I disagree- For one, Freenet .5 isn't blocked- For another, If they're blocking freenet, they can block a darknet almost as easily. Keep in mind, you do NOT need to expose network topography for a darknet. -Colin From Colin at sq7.org Sun Jun 25 22:20:53 2006 From: Colin at sq7.org (Colin Davis) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 18:20:53 -0400 Subject: [freenet-chat] Arguments against the Darknet In-Reply-To: References: <6E346768-CB71-4AAE-94EA-422C2F5AE3E1@sq7.org> Message-ID: > > FWIW, I agree with all your points. And I would add that no-one is > more than 2 steps away from a police spy - I find random connection > *adds* plausible deniability: although not (and this is a valid > point that has been made by the developers) if running Freenet is > itself a crime. But if every friend has at least one friend who is > a police spy, they are going to know you are running Freenet > anyway. The only defence is to have so many people running Freenet > that they don't bother to prosecute unless they already suspect you > of something, in which case they will always find something to > prosecute you for if they want to anyway. > > But is not the routing model for Freenet 0.7 dependent on some sort > of affinity network rather than the old open/random connection model? Yes, the routing model for .7 depends on clustered groups. But it's possible to maintain clustered groups with an opennet- Nothing says connections have to be randomly made, just made without user connection. From lars.j.nielsen at gmail.com Sun Jun 25 22:42:02 2006 From: lars.j.nielsen at gmail.com (Lars Juel Nielsen) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 00:42:02 +0200 Subject: [freenet-chat] Arguments against the Darknet In-Reply-To: <8ABD3C02-A459-4BC5-B46B-06AF78BB350C@sq7.org> References: <6E346768-CB71-4AAE-94EA-422C2F5AE3E1@sq7.org> <8ABD3C02-A459-4BC5-B46B-06AF78BB350C@sq7.org> Message-ID: On 6/26/06, Colin Davis wrote: > > > > If/when we do opennet people will use that instead till it gets > > blocked(it will happen eventually), then we're back to trying to get > > the darknet working for everyone again. If most people will use the > > opennet till it's impossible to do anymore there will be very few and > > probably small seperate darknets, a lot of data will be lost and time > > will need to be spent building up the net again as a darknet. > > I disagree- For one, Freenet .5 isn't blocked- For another, If > they're blocking freenet, they can block a darknet almost as easily. > Keep in mind, you do NOT need to expose network topography for a > darknet. Opennet is havestable so it's easier to block. And .5 is blocked in China so it has been done. It's also possible to do if it's a darknet but it'll require much more work to do. > > -Colin > _______________________________________________ > chat mailing list > chat at freenetproject.org > Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat > Or mailto:chat-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > From ian at revver.com Sat Jun 24 18:34:55 2006 From: ian at revver.com (Ian Clarke) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 11:34:55 -0700 Subject: [freenet-chat] Scientology strikes again In-Reply-To: <449D7678.3000805@vitriolix.com> References: <20060620230648.GA31038@amphibian.dyndns.org> <449D7678.3000805@vitriolix.com> Message-ID: On 24 Jun 2006, at 10: