6 ms·

The Darknet Project: netroots activists dream of global mesh network

153 points by divy 15y ago

conanite 15y ago
"The US State Department seems to view decentralized darknets as an important area of research for empowering free expression abroad." (my emphasis). Depressing!
- patrickod 15y ago
  Regardless of their intended audience the fact that they're interested is the important thing. If it's good it'll make it's way around the world.
- wmf 15y ago
  To be fair, another interpretation is that darknets are not needed in the US because you can use the regular Internet for free expression.
  - bh42222 15y ago
    Like donating to whistleblowing websites like WikiLeaks.
    - jyrkesh 15y ago
      To be fair, that was more of a private business decision on the part of PayPal than it was a government mandate. But I get what you're saying, and I agree that internet is not as open, even in the United States, as it could and should be.
    - sliverstorm 15y ago
      A darknet would make VISA do what you want?
- blhack 15y ago
  This was something that was discussed pretty heavily on the various IRC channels during the 2009 Iranian Election. Cell phones, wifi, etc. had mostly been cut off in Tehran, which is where there were some really horrible things happening that the rest of world needed to know about. In a situation like that, a mesh network full of wifi devices that could communicate with either HAM operators, or satellite internet operators would have been really helpful. A lot of people were actually surprised that the CIA didn't have something like this sitting on the shelf ready to be distributed. (And this is where I start sounding like one of those people, but the CIA has been involved in revolutions in places like South America. A communications kit seems like something that they would employ.)
mike-cardwell 15y ago
I can't help but think that projects to overlay a darknet on our existing Internet infrastructure are several orders of magnitude more likely to succeed.
- conanite 15y ago
  Overlaying on existing infrastructure is a faster way to get up and running, but ultimately a darknet that depends on another network is vulnerable to that network's centralized 'off' button.
  - davedx 15y ago
    See, that's what I didn't get about the article: DARPA intended the Internet to be built against single points of failure. Where is the Internet's 'off button'? Sure, there are exchanges and backbones that are more important than others (e.g. LINX in London), but it takes sustained and continuous efforts by a government to even come close to filtering/censoring the Internet effectively.
    - feral 15y ago
      What people generally say is that the net was designed to be robust against things like a nuclear strike taking out some part of the network. That is very different from saying that it can't be turned off, by a government with the power to legally compel infrastructure operators to do things. I'd say that the US government, if it wanted to, could turn off the Internet, for most of its citizens, over the course of a few days. What would stop this happening is the legal framework, and the business and societal infrastructure that depends on the Internet functioning; but not some technological property of the Internet. The ability to knock domains out, at the DNS level, was demonstrated not too long ago - e.g. http://torrentfreak.com/feds-seize-pokerstars-full-tilt-poker-and-absolute-poker-domains-110415/ http://torrentfreak.com/feds-seize-pokerstars-full-tilt-poke... Theres this meme out there that the Internet cant be turned off, because its designed in a 'decentralised' manner, and its just not true, in pragmatic terms.
      - 15y ago
law 15y ago
After reading the article and skimming some posts on their subreddit, I think the idea generally concerns the capabilities of consumer electronics to 'replicate' the Internet in a completely decentralized fashion. By doing so, there's no central authority managing your packets, and if you want to visit a particular node (i.e., to visit a web site), the problem becomes analogous to the stochastic shortest path problem, which is NP-complete. So, wouldn't this system require P = NP for it to have any viability at all when factoring in the effects of latency and downtime?
- joelthelion 15y ago
  Most NP-complete problems can be approximated quickly enough for practical purposes. Decentralized routing is a hard problem, but there has been a lot of research with pretty convincing results. I'm not sure if it scales to the size of the internet, though.
  - law 15y ago
    That's the point, though: I don't know if you can find an 'approximate' solution to decentralized routing, since you need precision. Do you have any peer-reviewed articles evidencing these convincing results? I'd be extremely interested in learning some more about this.
    - pyre 15y ago
      Who is the current centralized authority that figures out the shortest routes today?
      - law 15y ago
        Difference in definitions: I read "approximate solution" as an "approximate route," as in the node choices are approximated (potentially leading to a wrong final node, or losing packets at a dead end). Instead, finding approximately the shortest route that doesn't lose packets and gets you to the correct node would presumably work.
- 15y ago
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
rmc 15y ago
Looks interesting, but it seems to be just a talking shop at the moment, without any actual goods to show yet. it's hard to imagine that TDP will ever move beyond the conceptual stage. The group behind the effort is big on ideas but short on technical solutions for rolling out a practical implementation I like the idea of using WiFi as hardware, since it's a technology that's almost everywhere now.
giberson 15y ago
I remember hearing about China usurping 15% of western internet traffic for 18 minutes. This was accomplished by having nodes report as being the next closest hop in the network path to the packet destination. In a decentralized darknet project, I imagine such an issue being much more widespread. In fact, I would imagine a darknet project would actually play in to the hands of the government. It would be perfectly plausible to infest the darknet with millions of your own nodes reporting as the next best hops thus inserting themselves in the middle of all darknet traffic able to analyze data as it flows through the system. Obviously, a darknet would utilize encryption for traffic but all bets are off when you potentially have a constant man in the middle and no centralized authority on trusts. What's worse, and more to the point of playing into the hands of the government is that a darknet would give them (the government) a concentrated focus area. If I were to categorize the percentage of traffic that was "interesting" for regular internet traffic vs. the percentage of "interesting" traffic of all darknet traffic then I would imagine the darknet having a much higher ratio of noteworthy to junk traffic. If I had a limited amount of resources to invest in analyzing and decoding secure traffic I would obviously point my tools at the most richly dense data source.
- flyingbuttress 15y ago
  I think the goal of a darknet is more to prevent censorship than to ensure privacy. As you said, any untrusted nodes could easily reveal a user's location and intent. I would much prefer a network that piggybacks on the existing infrastructure and poses as innocuous traffic through stenography or encryption.
- jxcole 15y ago
  Man in the middle attacks may not work as well as you think. While it is possible to create false information using this darknet mechanism, it is possible using things like PGP to ensure that you are getting data from the same node. Of course, you have to figure out how to set it up right from the beginning; if someone messes with you before you know what their key is supposed to be, they can feed you false information. You might be able to overcome this by using a many-to-many authentication mechanism. But realistically, what could the government hope to accomplish by feeding you false information? (this is the only thing they are likely able to do). Consider: There is no way to back track traffic and discover who sent the request. Once you realize a source is feeding false information, you know to never trust that source again. It is easy to imagine a decentralized rating system for the quality of information provided by various keys on the network. Keep in mind you can't really fake who you are. You are your public key, no one else can publish under your public key but you. EDIT: I highly recommend reading the freent paper: http://freenetproject.org/papers/ddisrs.pdf http://freenetproject.org/papers/ddisrs.pdf
peterwwillis 15y ago
I'd like to note that "the Internet" is a vast, broadly-scoped amalgamation of routers and different network topologies. They don't use one kind of hardware or software to manage it all. Any successor or parallel alternative network should be as (if not more) flexible to achieve it's goals. I'd also like to suggest that the network be powered purely by standard Internet client machines and off-the-shelf hardware. Custom software would be necessary, but it's better to rely on a random guy with a quick installer on a USB key than custom hardware mesh routers deployed by professional installers.
- saucerful 15y ago
  Lucky for us, the new IEEE 802.11 was ratified in September and includes (finally) 802.11s for mesh networking. There is support in Linux and FreeBSD for several of the most popular wireless drivers. The open source router firmware dd-wrt also supports 11s.
  - peterwwillis 15y ago
    That is pretty damn cool, but I think for a serious "alternate Internet" to succeed, OSI layers 1 & 2 should not matter. An application installed by a regular user needs to be able to do most of the heavy lifting with most generic off-the-shelf hardware to get a really decentralized open alternative to take off like wildfire.
stfu 15y ago
They should do some kickstarter projects around this. I bet they could find a load of libertarians going all nuts over the idea. Wouldn't mind throwing some money at it myself.
wyck 15y ago
Here is a comprehensive list of open mesh/protocol links http://openmesh.wordpress.com/2011/01/30/a-list-of-open-source-ad-hoc-network-and-routing-protocolsplatforms/ http://openmesh.wordpress.com/2011/01/30/a-list-of-open-sour...
devindotcom 15y ago
This is interesting. I've been toying with a darknet idea, but it's not going to mirror the internet. "My" version is limited to plain text and packets no larger than 1kb, if even that. It'll show up on TechCrunch eventually, but I want to talk with some people first.
otoburb 15y ago
It would be pretty interesting if Republic Wireless allowed their phones to connect to the Darknet. There'd be no technical reason why they wouldn't, except perhaps they'd need to beef up their cheap Android phones with mesh protocols to form their own nodes. (Referenced HN thread that also happens to be on the front page: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3208563 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3208563)

153 points by divy 15y ago

"The US State Department seems to view decentralized darknets as an important area of research for empowering free expression abroad." (my emphasis). Depressing!

patrickod 15y ago
Regardless of their intended audience the fact that they're interested is the important thing. If it's good it'll make it's way around the world.
wmf 15y ago
To be fair, another interpretation is that darknets are not needed in the US because you can use the regular Internet for free expression.
- bh42222 15y ago
  Like donating to whistleblowing websites like WikiLeaks.
  - jyrkesh 15y ago
    To be fair, that was more of a private business decision on the part of PayPal than it was a government mandate. But I get what you're saying, and I agree that internet is not as open, even in the United States, as it could and should be.
  - sliverstorm 15y ago
    A darknet would make VISA do what you want?
blhack 15y ago
This was something that was discussed pretty heavily on the various IRC channels during the 2009 Iranian Election. Cell phones, wifi, etc. had mostly been cut off in Tehran, which is where there were some really horrible things happening that the rest of world needed to know about. In a situation like that, a mesh network full of wifi devices that could communicate with either HAM operators, or satellite internet operators would have been really helpful. A lot of people were actually surprised that the CIA didn't have something like this sitting on the shelf ready to be distributed. (And this is where I start sounding like one of those people, but the CIA has been involved in revolutions in places like South America. A communications kit seems like something that they would employ.)

mike-cardwell 15y ago

I can't help but think that projects to overlay a darknet on our existing Internet infrastructure are several orders of magnitude more likely to succeed.

conanite 15y ago
Overlaying on existing infrastructure is a faster way to get up and running, but ultimately a darknet that depends on another network is vulnerable to that network's centralized 'off' button.
- davedx 15y ago
  See, that's what I didn't get about the article: DARPA intended the Internet to be built against single points of failure. Where is the Internet's 'off button'? Sure, there are exchanges and backbones that are more important than others (e.g. LINX in London), but it takes sustained and continuous efforts by a government to even come close to filtering/censoring the Internet effectively.
  - feral 15y ago
    What people generally say is that the net was designed to be robust against things like a nuclear strike taking out some part of the network. That is very different from saying that it can't be turned off, by a government with the power to legally compel infrastructure operators to do things. I'd say that the US government, if it wanted to, could turn off the Internet, for most of its citizens, over the course of a few days. What would stop this happening is the legal framework, and the business and societal infrastructure that depends on the Internet functioning; but not some technological property of the Internet. The ability to knock domains out, at the DNS level, was demonstrated not too long ago - e.g. http://torrentfreak.com/feds-seize-pokerstars-full-tilt-poker-and-absolute-poker-domains-110415/ http://torrentfreak.com/feds-seize-pokerstars-full-tilt-poke... Theres this meme out there that the Internet cant be turned off, because its designed in a 'decentralised' manner, and its just not true, in pragmatic terms.
    - 15y ago

law 15y ago

After reading the article and skimming some posts on their subreddit, I think the idea generally concerns the capabilities of consumer electronics to 'replicate' the Internet in a completely decentralized fashion. By doing so, there's no central authority managing your packets, and if you want to visit a particular node (i.e., to visit a web site), the problem becomes analogous to the stochastic shortest path problem, which is NP-complete. So, wouldn't this system require P = NP for it to have any viability at all when factoring in the effects of latency and downtime?

joelthelion 15y ago
Most NP-complete problems can be approximated quickly enough for practical purposes. Decentralized routing is a hard problem, but there has been a lot of research with pretty convincing results. I'm not sure if it scales to the size of the internet, though.
- law 15y ago
  That's the point, though: I don't know if you can find an 'approximate' solution to decentralized routing, since you need precision. Do you have any peer-reviewed articles evidencing these convincing results? I'd be extremely interested in learning some more about this.
  - pyre 15y ago
    Who is the current centralized authority that figures out the shortest routes today?
    - law 15y ago
      Difference in definitions: I read "approximate solution" as an "approximate route," as in the node choices are approximated (potentially leading to a wrong final node, or losing packets at a dead end). Instead, finding approximately the shortest route that doesn't lose packets and gets you to the correct node would presumably work.
15y ago

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

rmc 15y ago

Looks interesting, but it seems to be just a talking shop at the moment, without any actual goods to show yet. it's hard to imagine that TDP will ever move beyond the conceptual stage. The group behind the effort is big on ideas but short on technical solutions for rolling out a practical implementation I like the idea of using WiFi as hardware, since it's a technology that's almost everywhere now.

giberson 15y ago

I remember hearing about China usurping 15% of western internet traffic for 18 minutes. This was accomplished by having nodes report as being the next closest hop in the network path to the packet destination. In a decentralized darknet project, I imagine such an issue being much more widespread. In fact, I would imagine a darknet project would actually play in to the hands of the government. It would be perfectly plausible to infest the darknet with millions of your own nodes reporting as the next best hops thus inserting themselves in the middle of all darknet traffic able to analyze data as it flows through the system. Obviously, a darknet would utilize encryption for traffic but all bets are off when you potentially have a constant man in the middle and no centralized authority on trusts. What's worse, and more to the point of playing into the hands of the government is that a darknet would give them (the government) a concentrated focus area. If I were to categorize the percentage of traffic that was "interesting" for regular internet traffic vs. the percentage of "interesting" traffic of all darknet traffic then I would imagine the darknet having a much higher ratio of noteworthy to junk traffic. If I had a limited amount of resources to invest in analyzing and decoding secure traffic I would obviously point my tools at the most richly dense data source.

flyingbuttress 15y ago
I think the goal of a darknet is more to prevent censorship than to ensure privacy. As you said, any untrusted nodes could easily reveal a user's location and intent. I would much prefer a network that piggybacks on the existing infrastructure and poses as innocuous traffic through stenography or encryption.
jxcole 15y ago
Man in the middle attacks may not work as well as you think. While it is possible to create false information using this darknet mechanism, it is possible using things like PGP to ensure that you are getting data from the same node. Of course, you have to figure out how to set it up right from the beginning; if someone messes with you before you know what their key is supposed to be, they can feed you false information. You might be able to overcome this by using a many-to-many authentication mechanism. But realistically, what could the government hope to accomplish by feeding you false information? (this is the only thing they are likely able to do). Consider: There is no way to back track traffic and discover who sent the request. Once you realize a source is feeding false information, you know to never trust that source again. It is easy to imagine a decentralized rating system for the quality of information provided by various keys on the network. Keep in mind you can't really fake who you are. You are your public key, no one else can publish under your public key but you. EDIT: I highly recommend reading the freent paper: http://freenetproject.org/papers/ddisrs.pdf http://freenetproject.org/papers/ddisrs.pdf

peterwwillis 15y ago

I'd like to note that "the Internet" is a vast, broadly-scoped amalgamation of routers and different network topologies. They don't use one kind of hardware or software to manage it all. Any successor or parallel alternative network should be as (if not more) flexible to achieve it's goals. I'd also like to suggest that the network be powered purely by standard Internet client machines and off-the-shelf hardware. Custom software would be necessary, but it's better to rely on a random guy with a quick installer on a USB key than custom hardware mesh routers deployed by professional installers.

saucerful 15y ago
Lucky for us, the new IEEE 802.11 was ratified in September and includes (finally) 802.11s for mesh networking. There is support in Linux and FreeBSD for several of the most popular wireless drivers. The open source router firmware dd-wrt also supports 11s.
- peterwwillis 15y ago
  That is pretty damn cool, but I think for a serious "alternate Internet" to succeed, OSI layers 1 & 2 should not matter. An application installed by a regular user needs to be able to do most of the heavy lifting with most generic off-the-shelf hardware to get a really decentralized open alternative to take off like wildfire.

stfu 15y ago

They should do some kickstarter projects around this. I bet they could find a load of libertarians going all nuts over the idea. Wouldn't mind throwing some money at it myself.

wyck 15y ago

Here is a comprehensive list of open mesh/protocol links http://openmesh.wordpress.com/2011/01/30/a-list-of-open-source-ad-hoc-network-and-routing-protocolsplatforms/ http://openmesh.wordpress.com/2011/01/30/a-list-of-open-sour...

devindotcom 15y ago

This is interesting. I've been toying with a darknet idea, but it's not going to mirror the internet. "My" version is limited to plain text and packets no larger than 1kb, if even that. It'll show up on TechCrunch eventually, but I want to talk with some people first.

otoburb 15y ago

It would be pretty interesting if Republic Wireless allowed their phones to connect to the Darknet. There'd be no technical reason why they wouldn't, except perhaps they'd need to beef up their cheap Android phones with mesh protocols to form their own nodes. (Referenced HN thread that also happens to be on the front page: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3208563 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3208563)