Re: [Vrs-development] Cluster image security/privacy question

[Bill Lance]

This is a very good question.  

BTW, it's not possible to be too paranoid when dealing
with security and privacy.

Chris's recent discussion of graphing connected nodes
might address this.

--- Eric Altendorf <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> I was just reading the cluster image document at
>       http://www.freesoftware.fsf.org/VRS/lds-detail.html
> 
> The following may be totally paranoid, but I bring
> it up since one of the 
> stated goals of the VRS is to be able to safely
> share information which has 
> been deemed inappropriate by a hostile social,
> religious, or governmental 
> environment.
> 
> I'm wondering if in such an environment, it would be
> wise to *not* let each 
> node hold the same cluster image, with information
> about all other nodes.  
> Perhaps it would be best for each node to *only*
> explicitly know about a few 
> other nodes, thus forming cluster subsets whose
> union is the entire cluster.  
> The idea, of course, is that should one node be
> attacked in one form or 
> another, and the cluster image be discovered, only
> the identity of a few 
> nodes in the cluster would be revealed, as opposed
> to the identity of all 
> participants.
> 
> I'm not sure if this is really an issue or not, and
> it is certainly a 
> complication we may not want to address at this
> point.  I thought I'd bring 
> it up, though.
> 
> Eric
> 
> -- 
> "First they ignore you.  Then they laugh at you.
>  Then they fight you.  And then you win."           
>  -Gandhi
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Vrs-development mailing list
> address@hidden
>
http://mail.freesoftware.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrs-development


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
http://health.yahoo.com