Slashdot Mirror

[ Amendment IV ]
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Want to read my stuff? Go ahead and crack it - no warrant necessary.

Get the rabbit installed on a machine behind your firewall
==> http://freenet.sourceforge.net/
Faster than freenet
==> http://www.i2p.net/
Encrypt Jabber
==> http://www.vanemery.com/Linux/Jabber/jabberd.html
Onion Routing
==> http://tor.eff.org/
Emerging Network To Reduce Orwellian Potency Yield
==> http://entropy.stop1984.com/
Free Internet telephony
==> http://skype.com/
GNU-ified P2p
==> http://www.gnu.org/software/gnunet/


DO NOT DENY yourself about 2 hours @ InfoAnarchy.org
OMG! ==> http://www.infoanarchy.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Pag e
LearnLearnLearnLearn ==> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptography

=================EMAIL ENCRYPTION===============
GPG (Free PGP)
==> http://gnupg.org/
Integrated with Thunderbird
==> http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
Mutt can't be beat as a mailreader and integrates GPG wonderfully.
==> http://mutt.blackfish.org.uk/
==> http://www.mutt.org/links.html
==> http://wiki.mutt.org/index.cgi?UserPages

!!! Please do not immediately send newly created keys to the keyservers (as many HOWTOs instruct new users to). They are already overflowing with "test keys" and other people's experiments from over the years THAT HAVE NO EXPIRATION and will never be deleted. These keys are "orphans" and most will never be used. As keyservers sync together, and most keys are never deleted once submitted - GET YOUR KEY SETUP CORRECTLY AND HAVE PRACTICE WITH IT BEFORE SENDING IT OFF TO THE KEYSERVERS!!! Otherwise storage requirements will continue to grow and using these in the future will become more difficult FOR ALL. Please, if you are just starting out with PGP or GPG or GnuPG or anything similar (the last two are in fact the same thing) use manual key distribution to begin (ascii armor your public key with


$ gpg --export --armor my@email.address.org

and copy and paste it into an email body or attach it to an email


$ gpg --export --armor my@email.address.org > myPubKey.txt

to gain practice with GPG before uploading your key. This way if you need to create another you won't have uploaded your mistakes. Many choices need to be made and it's worth getting things right before "going public" with your new digital ID. Experiment with yourself and a few different email accounts or with some friends first.)

SET AN EXPIRATION OF 2-5 YEARS OR SO AND MAKE SURE YOU HAVE YOUR PREFERENCES THE WAY YOU LIKE THEM BEFORE SENDING TO A KEYSERVER! Better yet is to HOST YOUR

Unfortunately, Freenet became a dead project about a year or 2 ago. I ran it off and on between 2000 (when it was started) and last year, and it's always been extremely questionable as to whether data would be retrievable or not, let alone retrievable *quickly*.

As of the spring of last year or so, Freenet had ceased to reliably retrieve pretty much any data at all, so I gave up on it (again).

Sadly, Freenet died under the weight of its own insane complexity and the inherently low performance of Java with which it was written.

There was also Entropy ( http://entropy.stop1984.com/ ), written in C and much faster than Freenet (though less secure), but development on that stopped sometime last year as well. At present, I know of no project which offers the following features:

* encrypted, plausibly-deniable data store (basically, an encrypted filesystem contained within files on your HDD)
* encrypted network traffic
* routing of requested data through multiple nodes (i.e. proxying)

...as Freenet and Entropy had, effectively creating a second Internet... Some of the Entropy developers, IIRC, moved to I2P ( www.i2p.net ), however, but I2P seemingly only does traffic encryption and routing, not data storage and searching as well...

[ Amendment IV ]
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Want to read my stuff? Go ahead and crack it - no warrant necessary.

Get the rabbit installed on a machine behind your firewall
==> http://freenet.sourceforge.net/
Faster than freenet
==> http://www.i2p.net/
Encrypt Jabber
==> http://www.vanemery.com/Linux/Jabber/jabberd.html
Onion Routing
==> http://tor.eff.org/
Emerging Network To Reduce Orwellian Potency Yield
==> http://entropy.stop1984.com/
Free Internet telephony
==> http://skype.com/
GNU-ified P2p
==> http://www.gnu.org/software/gnunet/


DO NOT DENY yourself about 2 hours @ InfoAnarchy.org
OMG! ==> http://www.infoanarchy.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Pag e
LearnLearnLearnLearn ==> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptography

=================EMAIL ENCRYPTION===============
GPG (Free PGP)
==> http://gnupg.org/
Integrated with Thunderbird
==> http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
Mutt can't be beat as a mailreader and integrates GPG wonderfully.
==> http://mutt.blackfish.org.uk/
==> http://www.mutt.org/links.html
==> http://wiki.mutt.org/index.cgi?UserPages

!!! Please do not immediately send newly created keys to the keyservers (as many HOWTOs instruct new users to). They are already overflowing with "test keys" and other people's experiments from over the years THAT HAVE NO EXPIRATION and will never be deleted. These keys are "orphans" and most will never be used. As keyservers sync together, and most keys are never deleted once submitted - GET YOUR KEY SETUP CORRECTLY AND HAVE PRACTICE WITH IT BEFORE SENDING IT OFF TO THE KEYSERVERS!!! Otherwise storage requirements will continue to grow and using these in the future will become more difficult FOR ALL. Please, if you are just starting out with PGP or GPG or GnuPG or anything similar (the last two are in fact the same thing) use manual key distribution to begin (ascii armor your public key with

$ gpg --export --armor my@email.address.org

and copy and paste it into an email body or attach it to an email

$ gpg --export --armor my@email.address.org > myPubKey.txt

to gain practice with GPG before uploading your key. This way if you need to create another you won't have uploaded your mistakes. Many choices need to be made and it's worth getting things right before "going public" with your new digital ID. Experiment with yourself and a few different email accounts or with some friends first.)

SET AN EXPIRATION OF 2-5 YEARS OR SO AND MAKE SURE YOU HAVE YOUR PREFERENCES THE WAY YOU LIKE THEM BEFORE SENDING TO A KEYSERVER! Better yet is to HOST YOUR KEY ON YOUR WEBSITE (or try using http://biglumber.com/ instead to host your key and help c

What about E.N.T.R.O.P.Y. for that matter? A new field like this needs as many different approaches as possible. We are in "throw against the wall and see what sticks" mode now.

I suggest checking out Entropy.

The author learned from Freenet's faults and created this to fix it. Not only is the network much faster, it is written in C so you get much better CPU/memory usage. It is also compatible with FCP, so most of your Freenet client apps will work with little or no change.

I currently have a Freenet node with a 50gig store, 30gig of that used. It has been perm on the network for a few months now. On the other hand, my Entropy node has been running for two weeks and is an order of magnitude faster at getting files than Freenet.

Well, the only two that are worth mentioning are GNUnet and Entropy. GNUnet has it's advantages but lacks the concept of "homepages," aka. Freesites (freenet's version of a webpage.) This is a real drawback when it comes to attracting newbies. Entropy on the other hand has the advantage of being written in C (or ++) and having a http proxy/interpreter... but development is slow and the userbase is very very small.

In the end, when it comes to security, freenet is probably the most secure, it has the largest userbase but it's flakey as hell.. Ever since March 31st/April 1st of 2003, it's just been downhill.

Actually, that's what Freenet and ENTROPY are meant to do.

Also, to those naysayers: try to keep up with the latest Freenet/ENTROPY builds.

Freenet is deader than month-old roadkill fed to a shark. Freenet is an awesome idea, and I've been running it off-and-on (when it's working) for the last 4 years or so, but it hasn't really been working for several months. It really is sad.

Entropy, OTOH, works quite well and because it's written in C, it doesn't eat up RAM like the Java-written Freenet does.

But I am worried about the one really unlucky Joe Sixpacks who get chosen as the first few test cases in the West. Some poor slob who think Freenet's just another way to "freely" swap MP3s with reduced risks of getting a nastygram from RIAA, but who wakes up to black-masked agents screaming "FEDERAL AGENT! WE KNOW YOU'RE HOSTING ILLEGAL PR0N! DON'T MOVE, YOU PERVERTED FREAK!"

First of all: You can always be sued by someone. The point is however that the charge will not stick(under western laws) if you are running a freenet node.(and if you do not store the download files on your HD to view them offline). Maybe you can sue back for damages, but this will not be fun.

Second: Freenet / Gnunet /entropy /pick your own anonymizer will never be good for downloading big files. This is because for a good anonimyzing network without a central server there will be always a multiple of network traffic required. There are networks-protocols that are better suited for this. (typical: if data travels a average of 6 hops, you will have to transfer 13 MB of data to download 1 MB)

So use entropy. It'swritten in C.

If you want a "more friendly Freenet" you should know where to find one.

Like this?

Or use Entropy, which unlike Freenet, actually works.

The book and the memos are mirrored here:

SSK@THn_MFmAqoGeXk9COwwSiFp6PAvBCMA/bbv//

(requires Entropy)

Because its dreadfully slow, and mostly unusable. Better off using Entropy or GNUnet, like we discussed last week

You could just mirror it once on Entropy or Freenet and it would go where ever it is wanted.

Bittorrent is not anonymous or encrypted, so the Indian government could easily track it down and block it. It would be better for you to use something like Entropy to mirror the web boards' content.

Why doesn't someone put there money where their mouth is and port it over to another language if they dont like Java so much?

I do believe someone is porting over Freenet from Java to another C language, and the project is called Entropy:

http://entropy.stop1984.com/en/intro.html

I am sure that any help will be welcomed in the freenet project, and even if not its open source so go ahead and port it over to your favourite language.

There is a clone of Freenet that is written in C called Entropy. You can download it from their web site.

For the money it's a great service but you really need a minimum of 640/256 and no big filesharing running. I have a 1m T1 with vonage and about 7 computers, 3 of which running the Entropy project, which is similar to Freenet. One computer does a lot of Lotus Notes replicating on some huge files. I've had nothing but amazing successes. In fact, I was online one night downloading some 600m iso's and playing some online streaming movie previews while talking long distance (using vonage) to a friend. Everything was real time.

As with anything your mileage may vary but this a nice service for those of us who are hooked on the internet.

There is a clone of Freenet called Entropy written in C. It doesn't have many users though, compared to Freenet.

However, if you don't like Freenet's large size and resource consumption, you should try Entropy which is basically the same as Freenet but it is written in C instead of Java.

Both projects are GPLed.

Check out Entropy. It is a Freenet implementation in C, which tries to retain compatibility with the original Freenet.

I now understand all this anti-1984 activism

Apart from the fact that we've had echelon setup to do this for years, although I think local police would need a damn good reason (i.e. suspected terrorism) to get this info.

It sounds like Verisign would only be able to do this after the courts had awarded a proper warrent. Currently the EU is trying to force companies to store digital network data regardless of whether that data is part of a criminal case or not. Go sign this if it sounds like a bad idea to you.

Not only ISPs; all telecoms. All data. Seven years. The EU draftsman, Marco Capatto, is not happy with the data collection/retention clause, and has written a report on the proposal-- an interesting read. The problem is that this is a step away from the various governments independently deciding how to handle data collection and retention; the bill forces them to enact legislation that collects and retains in accordance with this bill. stop1984 has issued a press release on the subject.

EU is preparing new legistaltion, which would make compulsory data retention possible forthe member states. The crusial vote on Directive on the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector is scheduled for 29 May. More detailed information about the directive and backgrounds can be found from here.

GILC members have launced also a lobbying campaing including an open letter, which can be signed here.

Here's also Marco Cappato's (the person in charge of the directive in European Parliament) press release about the situation:

PRIVACY/EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: CAPPATO (RADICALS) "PPE AND PSE TABLE IN THE EP THE COUNCIL PROPOSALS : IN THIS WAY EUROPE WOULD AUTHORISE DATA RETENTION OF EUROPEAN CITIZENS' INTERNET AND TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS"

Brussels, 23 may 2002

European PPE (conservatives) and PSE (socialists) have tabled yesterday common amendments to the Cappato report on privacy in electronic communications, that take over the Council positions on all main issues. Their content is in striking contradiction with the EP first reading position as confirmed by the EP Civil Liberties Committee during the second reading.
The discussion in the EP will take place on the 29th of May in Brussels, while the vote will follow on the next day.

Declaration by Marco Cappato, MEP of the Lista Bonino/Radical Party and EP draftsman
on the EU Commission proposal on the protection of privacy in electronic communications:

"With these amendments, PPE and PSE have abandoned the stance that the EP had taken in first reading and confirmed in second reading in the EP Civil Liberties committee, without getting any politically meaningful concession from the Council.
Ana Palacio Vallelersundi (PPE Spanish MEP), President of the Civil Liberties committee (and Spanish conservative Government representative in the Convention) has promoted the tabling in the EP of amendments that take over the (Spanish conservative) Presidency of the Council gaining the support of the Socialist group in the EP, with the only aim of avoiding the conciliation procedure between the Council and the EP and allowing the Spanish Presidency to close successfully the dossier.
PPE MEPs, that had supported until now the freedom for Member States to decide on the regime to adopt on unsolicited commercial communications, opt-out on directories and cookies, now obey to the Spanish Presidency indications and unite with the PSE in supporting a European opt-in system - although in a softened version - in all the abovementioned cases.
But the most controversial issue is that of the powers the Council wants to give to Member States to impose to Telecom and Internet service providers the retaining of data concerning citizens' communications, SMS, emails, Internet surfing. The PPE-PSE amendment (that goes beyond the legal basis of the directive, that is an internal market measure) inserts in the articles the possibility for Member States to provide for data retention, while guarantees for citizens' privacy are left to a reference to the general principles of community law and to the EU Treaty. The reference to the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights is relegated in the PPE-PSE amendment in the recitals (while the EP had included it in the articles).
I appeal to MEPs to ask them to vote following their conscience and not on a party basis, and to follow my request to delete from the articles of the directive the reference to data retention of citizens' communications."

For more informations:
Marco Cappato offices: 0032 2 2847496
mcappato@europarl.eu.int www.radicalparty.org

Help stopping a propsal that will force the ISP's in the EU to store info on their users for several years.

info at http://stop1984.com/index2.php?text=letter.txt
I guess we're heading the same way as you guys