11 ms·
You broke the Internet. We're making ourselves a GNU one [video]
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- aw3c2 13y agoI think this is it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lcauMH70cA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lcauMH70cA http://internetistschuld.de/ http://internetistschuld.de/ edit: Could have used a sock over the microphone.
- txutxu 13y agoDidn't know this project (gnunet). I see it provides file sharing and vpn. VPN will fix some ISP level tracking issues. Private file sharing will protect some cloud surveillance and limiting laws. This is great, to minimise surveillance. It's nice to be able to share files properly, but it's not my "typical" internet usage (neither it's on my family members). It's nice to be able to go out through a sane VPN. Still I miss important things to fix my "internet": * DNS and search. * Email service. * Browser. These are my main problems today. I can workaround my ISP when I want, and I can share files in the way I like... but I see the problem in my previous 3 points. Also I wish so many interesting initiatives could be separated of the "pirate" "trademark". It's not a problem for me, but I think it's not a proper "image" for general purpose projects, just because of how people brain works in "general" (in special people not literate about what this really is). Nice talks, and thanks for the link.
- lmm 13y agoGnunet provides its own search layer. In theory you could use it without needing DNS.
- microcolonel 13y agoIf you're already willing to sacrifice privacy for convenience, they already have you. If you're using OSX or that wacky hybrid kernel system from Redmond, WA, You're basically screwed anyway because your endpoints are compromised from day one. Here's the thing, if you jump at every convenience then blame people working on the vast and complex software required to support privacy, absolutely nobody will come to your defense. I set my bar very low, if I can obscure the source location of my IRC and email traffic, then I'm all good; All other channels are secondary, and are not worth bursting my basic network node anonymity over if there's no other option.
- ruir 13y agoAs someone who cares about security and privacy, I'd like to know why I'd want to obscure the location of IRC/email traffic. On IRC I can see that you could come across adversaries on some sketchy irc networks - but, in my case, as just a random developer idling away on freenode (using a host cloak) should I really care that I'm trusting freenode? And what about email? Is that because your ip will be visible on the mail headers if sent from localhost? And if you're using a VPN or Tor, aren't you just displacing the trust to those providers? Another thing I'd like to know is just how much more of a potential target you become once you use the tor network. I speculate that tor has a lot of blackhats fishing for potential targets.
- muyuu 13y agoAnonymous, secure, encrypted and instant random web browsing is simply not possible. Technically not possible. If you want anonymity, privacy and security you will have to make certain compromises to your "current internet" that isn't anonymous nor private, but instant and convenient. Or you can just give up and accept having your every step in the net monitored.
- 13y ago
- spindritf 13y agoI like that the player gives out (right click) the location of the video and even offers an option to download it. That may be more important than the permissive license. The server, however, seems to be a bit overloaded at the moment. Is there a torrent somewhere? Maybe an HD torrent? EDIT: Fist English talk starts at 4:10.
- raphman 13y agoRight-click download is an implicitly inherent feature of the HTML5 <video> element that is used, not an explicit choice by the creators. I love it, too.
- northwest 13y agoThe other "darknet" options: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darknet_%28file_sharing%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darknet_%28file_sharing%29 The most complete one seems to be http://retroshare.sourceforge.net/ http://retroshare.sourceforge.net/
- Sami_Lehtinen 13y agoRetroshare is F2F (darknet) network. But Freenet and GNUnet provide generic anonymous networking (with efficient caching!), without you setting up contacts with your peers beforehand. Network where you can access only preknown resources isn't that useful after all. At least for finding new peers. Think about web browser, if you could only open pages which urls you already know. Who needs Google for anything? With retroshare all resources are gone if you delete those, with Freenet & GNUnet you simply can't delete anything. Very different design. Plz read white and design papers. Also see: http://secushare.org/ http://secushare.org/
- northwest 13y ago> With retroshare all resources are gone if you delete those, with Freenet & GNUnet you simply can't delete anything. Sure, that's true and the advantage of Freenet and GNUnet. The flip side of the caching is of course that this comes at a cost: It takes a lot more resources to have this kind of redundancy. RetroShare btw does let you download files anonymously from friends-of-friends etc. if the "owner" agrees to it. (You only have to know your immediate friends.)
- Sami_Lehtinen 13y agoYes, but redundancy also means that resources are never unavailable due overload etc. As hacker news users know, sites with most interesting new content are often down. With efficient caching, that simply won't happen. Btw. BitTorrent could utilize caching also much more efficiently. I know RS allows TurtleHopping, which is extremely inefficient method of transferring data, compared to GNUnets solution. With GNUnet you can transfer data directly with the source anonymously, while also at the very same time creating new sources for that data.
- blahbl4hblah 13y ago"your internet, huh?" sense of entitlement? Check.
- slacka 13y agoFor the tech savvy, there are plenty of solutions to "fix the internet". From Tor to I2P, I use many of these tools regularly. Many more can be found here. https://gist.github.com/postmodern/5018337 https://gist.github.com/postmodern/5018337 We don't need more tools, we need tools that non-geeks can use. For example, ten years ago, I worked at a company with a policy to use PGP with Symantec PGP software installed on PCs. Even the engineers sill failed to use it regularly. On several occasions I had to use logmein because the other company's IT department was incapable of setting up PGP for their own users. Ten years later and the Ask Slashdot is how get someone to send them their public key. http://ask.slashdot.org/story/13/08/10/0028235/ask-slashdot-.. http://ask.slashdot.org/story/13/08/10/0028235/ask-slashdot-.... I only have 2 contacts that I can use PGP to communicate with. Usability is the issue. Unfortunately most GNU Projects have never excelled in this area. It's too bad Mozilla dropped support for Thunderbird. Tight integration with GnuPG + a Mozilla cloud Public key directory could have made mainstream PGP a reality.
- northwest 13y agoWell, Thunderbird has the add-on called "Enigmail" which makes it easy. AFAIK there's no key directory integrated, but then again, is a key directory really a good idea? It adds another attack vector. And then of course, this only "solves" the email problem, unlike darknet solutions.
- slacka 13y agoYes, it is, but the alternative is what we have now. Practically no one using PGP. You have a better idea to fix usability of PGP?
- northwest 13y agoNo Sir.
- mtgx 13y agoIntegrate it in an e-mail service that is very popular like Gmail, lead everyone through an initial set-up to create their public keys, and then tie that key to their profile. Then you won't have to know anyone's public key anymore, and everyone would be using PGP by default. The only issue is that Google would have to ensure you're creating the private key as "locally" and securely as possible, without them being able to copy that key to their servers when they're creating them. That might be very tricky, while still remaining convenient, and they may have to allow for independent audits so we can make sure they aren't transmitting the data.
- natch 13y agoI wish they had one more, more universally appealing, bullet on the "Everybody has secrets" slide: * Personal and family information
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- AsymetricCom 13y agoSo, do you still want to donate to ACLU instead of FSF?
- mark_l_watson 13y agoI support both. A good investment.
- drmr 13y agoToo bad the secushare slides are completely unreadable. Or is it part of some obfuscation strategy?
- anigbrowl 13y agoIs this going to be like the Hurd? Because ideology and functionality seem pretty orthogonal to me. http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html
- cromwellian 13y agoDefeating traffic analysis has too many downsides for most users, I think the perfect is the enemy of the good here. Having at least working confidentiality and integrity to the content of communications in messaging would be a step up. The NSA will still be able to see who you're talking to, but the crypto-libertarian utopia is not about to arrive any time soon, especially with FreeNet like systems, but getting most people on a better system that reduces the amount of snooping, is better than building an idealized system which the great unwashed masses won't use.
- SingleFounderCo 13y agoI have a little different take. So, let's assume that you can combine 5+ encryptions / encryption points and hide the contents of you communication on someone else's network. IT IS STILL SOMEONE ELSE'S NETWORK. What happens when the network owner becomes China (game already over), UK (now blocking porn, next political speech, etc. >> game over), USSR, USSA, etc. and decides that your packets look like something we don't transfer. Or what about the old proposal to require a license to use the Internet? -- see http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100204/1925188060.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100204/1925188060.shtml and http://business.time.com/2010/01/30/drivers-licenses-for-the-internet/ http://business.time.com/2010/01/30/drivers-licenses-for-the... and a million other links. Solutions built on top of some existing (OWNED) platform are inherently fragile until there's a private (P2P-like HAM radio to smoke signal) transfer pipe.
- AsymetricCom 13y agoYou should try to make a tiny effort to check the link before commenting.
- SingleFounderCo 13y agoOK - here's another. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/government/internet-attack-defense-license-and-registration-please/6934 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/government/internet-attack-defense... "Yet the reality is, governments may have to reconsider such an requirement. It may not fly today, but don't be surprised if it becomes reality in the near future. Every device connected to the Internet will have a permament license plate and without it, the network won't allow you to log in." The point is that people have been calling for this for 10 years and it's going to happen SO why would you expect that the "Internet police" would allow you to move around in any manner (speed, intoxication level, destination, type of transport, etc.) that you see fit?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- louwrentius 13y agoAlthough I admire the smart people who build these tools, the issue at hand is not technological. We all know that it takes two to tango and we also know that the other person will not be able to use all these privacy tools. The NSA has infinite resources and will get to you or your data. You can't protect yourself from an evil government. You will loose. Using these privacy tools only makes you a target (child pornografy, terrorist) and will give them an excuse to further target you. With the resources NSA has at hand, how many 0-days will they have at their disposal for any software product? I believe we can never resolve this issue in any other way than through politics.
- mark_l_watson 13y agoI went through the steps of building the GNUnet stack yesterday - a nice idea, but they have a long way to go. BTW, I watched the video of the conference in Germany yesterday and blogged my summary of what Richard said: http://markwatson.com/blog/2013-08/fsf-more-relevant-than-ever.html http://markwatson.com/blog/2013-08/fsf-more-relevant-than-ev...
- nimbusvid 13y agoHere is a higher bandwidth link to the same video http://www.nimbusvid.com/mega/#!xAEGXQiD!ez8HoC-LS4m2k2YYGZPyIjZahYFX6dGG44Mr3yGU9pk http://www.nimbusvid.com/mega/#!xAEGXQiD!ez8HoC-LS4m2k2YYGZP...