5 ms·
I skimmed your paper, but I'm curious, based on your research into this area what an alternative would be to create private networks for citizens without laying
by deanclatworthy 13y ago
I skimmed your paper, but I'm curious, based on your research into this area what an alternative would be to create private networks for citizens without laying out cable everywhere (which theoretically could also be tapped).
- einhverfr 13y agoAs opposed to wireless which doesn't have to be tapped (i.e. can just be listened in on with antennas)?
- jacquesm 13y agoThat's orthogonal. Private networks can be made up from any technology, privacy is another axis.
- einhverfr 13y agoMy point is that if you are opposed to cables because they can be tapped, wireless poses more problems....
- jacquesm 13y agoI saw the 'also' in the ggp as referring to both wireless and cable networks. So he's aware of that.
- devx 13y agoYes, but P2P mesh networks that are built for security have an advantage. They're encrypted end to end, for every node, and there's no one to implement a backdoor for the government, like in the case of ISP's. The ISP's right now are giving the government access all the data, unencrypted. It's going to be a lot harder to "tap" a secure mesh network that's encrypted at every node. I would look more into this one: http://hyperboria.net/ http://hyperboria.net/
- 16s 13y agoThis is true. And if the FCC were to give up spectrum for use in mesh networks, they could always require that no encryption be used. They mandate this with amateur radio. A HAM's license could be revoked if he was caught sending encrypted transmissions.