Re: [Mldonkey-users] Re: Mldonkey and anonymity

[Christian Loitsch]

> Just consider the situation if anti-p2p people maintain a hacked freenet
> node.
you don't really care.

I will give an extreme example.  Suppose you have a p2p network, were
_all_ nodes are supposed to have _all_ files cached.  Connections
between to nodes are encrypted and even if no file is transfered clients
send data to other peers.  Data which is received is pushed to other
nodes with a random delay.  (Forget about duplicates at the moment)

Now tell, who was the client, who injected a file.
Or which client really wants the file.

Of course everybody has it, but you can always decline being interested
in it.  (and because it was encrypted, you didn't even know)

> Do you think it can *really* be secure?
I do, but there's some overhead.  Personally I am thinking about a
network, where a client "randomly" downloads files.  This could add the
benefit of spreading files.  As soon as you are able to say, that it
wasn't you, but you program, they should have a hard time attacking you.
Especially, if it is difficult/impossible to find out, what you are
caching.
Btw, if ever somebody tries to design such a network, I also thought
quite some time about how to "force" uploads.

> Hashing the key and encrypting the data is not meant a method to keep Freenet
> Node operators from being able to figure out what type of information is in
> their nodes if they really want to (after all, they can just find the key in
> the same way as someone who requests the information would) but rather to
> keep operators from having to know what information is in their nodes if they
> don't want to. 
Exactly what I said.  As soon, as you don't know what you're caching,
they can't attack you.

christian