[freenet-dev] [freenet-cvs] r16974 - trunk/freenet/src/freenet/node

[David Sowder]

Yeah, someone had already suggested N2NTMs between opennet peers on IRC, 
but to me, that would not only discourage the adoption of darknet 
peerings but also, for purposes of establishing a darknet connection, it 
would be starting at the extreme opposite end of the trust scale (in my 
book) than a darknet peering needs to be, rather than an otherwise 
neutral position.  Imagine attackers using opennet to pick your node and 
then using N2NTMs to build a "trust" relationship with you to get a 
darknet peering with you, which you might then think of a "trustworthy" 
and "secure".  (I'd definitely have the fact that I met them on opennet 
in my private peer note on that peer.)

Michael Rogers wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
>   
>> I had assumed that N2NMs were a mechanism for clients (including fproxy, which 
>> is an internal client) to communicate with each other. N2NMs are therefore 
>> only useful on darknet, since on opennet there is no reason to talk to other 
>> local clients -
>>     
>
> I was going to suggest N2N chat between opennet peers, perhaps with an
> eye to establishing a darknet connection. But there's a danger that,
> since it's Freenet, users will assume they're anonymous when chatting...
> and there doesn't seem much point offering a friendly service like N2N
> chat if it has to be plastered in warnings.
>